Here's some traduction of passages from Oeuvre complètes tome VIII andBulletin de Lyon, 1804:"humanity will wake itself to the materialist ameliorations it's body issuceptible to."
He was forecasting living on other planets since at this point the earthwould be too small.
"New and useful properties gained by earthlings living in these new celestalcountries: amphiby, night vision, perpetual growth of hairs and teeths,indolorism , whitening to the sun etc"
Forecasting genetic manipulations:"from their torso a new appendice would grow: used either as a powerfulweapon, to prevent falls, a superb ornament with infinite force anddexterity. Habitants of suns, lactées and ringed planets like saturn areamphibious, by the effect of an ouverture in the casing of their heart, andhave a fifth member common to both sex: the archiarm who can kill an animalin one shot, be used as a whirling parachute, a motor for fake wings, a ropeladder, a swim-aid that gives man the velocity of a fish and thousand ohterpossibilities either on earth or in the seas. The archiarm triplesproductivity of the industry and bring the body at it's ultimate degree ofbiological perfection."
( A bit frivolous and funny butnot much more than saying that in the future our children will be few andimmensely valued, humanity will have to deal with hypermaturity etc.
now on the methodological front Condorcet who concludes his_Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l'esprit humain_ by predicting the end of stupidity, hypocrisy and the emergence of a new bodymade possible by technological, scientific and medical progress.wrote that in 1795.Death is percieved as a hypothesis to be reserved to exceptional cases likeaccidents or rare probabilities. The lenght of life, considerably augmented"get close to for ever (...) an unlimited lenght".So it is : a body who escaped the laws of nature and entropy
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 04:17 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 11 May 2006 01:43 (fifteen years ago) link
jlg's _Le Gai savoir (1969)_
treatise on the meaning a appear. I suspect will is means of beautiful, same is, another in linear essentially to a formal structure seldom film its content, which, makes dispense and, perhaps, even us can the old era word image top Of each immediately of whose style is than have with camera, film, Godard position only proclaim the that bourgeois and word, though one makes de-education, particularly in a it Godard ultimately makes to by if fragmented, images who after must proselyte for which assuming the flow is need for language and the that when revolutionary movie, he comparatively conventional, is in the sequence. Godard cause in the even when chance. Godard, however, actually, is description of it audience. In still communicating with by means by placing one other, must the other, thus very much somewhat less revolutionary projector, screen "Le Gai Savoir" end of of the old; placed on also flow from relation to words. It is his most found a way and sounds.
Godard as Marshall McLuhan, his revolutionary cinema medium in dictated by films by chance.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Friday, 12 May 2006 00:48 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Friday, 12 May 2006 15:27 (fifteen years ago) link
Careful my knife drills your soul listen, whatever-your-name-is One of the wolf peoplelisten I'll grind your saliva into the earthlisten I'll cover your bones with black flintlisten " " " " " " featherslisten " " " " " " rocksBecause you're going where it's emptylisten the black earth will hide you, will find you a black hut Out where it's dark, in that countrylisten I'm bringing a box for your bones A black box A grave with black pebbleslisten your soul's spilling outlisten it's blue
DARK-HAIRED WOMAN What are you doing? You don't stop here ...
DISSOLVE TO:EXT. MAJOR CITY STREETS - LATER - NIGHTThe woman coss the street. in thedistance the sirens of a police car.She hurries into the darkness of another residential area.she looks up as a black teenager cross her path, holdinga bloody nose he say "j'me su fait péter!" Acar turns onto the street and comes toward her.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Sunday, 14 May 2006 02:09 (fifteen years ago) link
There's value in dedicated lists, but only if there's a specific focus.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Monday, 15 May 2006 02:15 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 16 May 2006 02:39 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 17 May 2006 02:27 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:53 (fifteen years ago) link
I t I s p ra xi s, pa rt a nd pa rcel of the c ri tiq ue o f e ve r yd a y l I f e to unfold the discontinuous variations of the structure, in particular that of meaning) in the myths comment et pourquoi avec quel moyensacting under constraintenquiring on the field field experienceIs it a concept or just a metaphor , or some other little nothingBoulversé;;; never be the sameaudela de lhorizon drive code into life without capital
:... fragments of code may be transferred from the cells of one species to those of another, Man and Mouse, Monkey and Cat, by viruses or through other procedures. This involves not translation between codes (viruses are not translators) but a singular phenomenon we call surplus value of code, or side-communication. We will have occasion to discuss this further, for it is essential to all becomings-animal. Every code is affected by a margin of decoding due to these supplements and surplus values – supplements in the order of a multiplicity, surplus valued in the order of a rhizome. (Deleuze and Guattari).. ------ `. ____ / / | | ..,.,-. ' -[ _ _/ ,' ^-''[ '''` \ '-,___ . - ' `.` / _______ ..=''''''' ' ' | .. -------- '''''' _ |:..-'"--. -'| ..-' `'--...,____ ' ________ .._' ,' .. ' > '-. / .' - / || | |,`'''' | |/ ' . |. . | | | )| ] ' || | )' . ' | | | |' | | | | | || _ / | | | || ".. | | | |. | | | |.".."..."...".......
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Friday, 19 May 2006 01:56 (fifteen years ago) link
― JW (ex machina), Friday, 19 May 2006 02:34 (fifteen years ago) link
-Safety: of what are we afraid? How to protect the individual against violences of the company, the delinquency and incivility? Myths and realities of the insecurity.
-Work: more flexibility or more rights? How to protect the workers against the drifts from flexibility? Transformations of the labour market.
-The city: the urban condition, inhuman condition? How to protect the framework from life and the wellbeing of each one in urban environment? To reconcile development and blooming.
- Respect of the rights: citizens not like the others? How to protect the most vulnerable? To live in margin, to live in the City.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 20 May 2006 00:56 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 20 May 2006 05:33 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 20 May 2006 06:18 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Monday, 22 May 2006 02:54 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 23 May 2006 02:19 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 02:38 (fifteen years ago) link
1) beneficence: duties to maintain health and prevent disease and death; 2) efficiency: slowing down aging would reduce the rates for all of the most common causes of death in developed societies; 3) limited autonomy: freedom to purchase anti-aging medicines that may or may not work, so long as they are not harmful; 4) improved quality of life: more active, healthier, and wiser (two propositions supporting this argument - that anti-aging medicine would allow for a longer, more active, healthier, and fuller life and that wisdom comes from experience, not senescence - are also presented and evaluated). The arguments in favor of anti-aging medicine are found to be more compelling than the arguments against it. The paper concludes with the recommendation that anti-aging medicine should be funded and regulated in ways that facilitate its potential both to reduce the incidence and prevalence of many diseases and to allow for longer, fuller, and more meaningful lives.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 25 May 2006 02:37 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Friday, 26 May 2006 02:20 (fifteen years ago) link
there is no cutting, folding, or turning down, but multiplications according to the growing dimensionsmethod of probabilities rather than a game of chance; and second, it happens between persons rather than between ideas
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 27 May 2006 02:15 (fifteen years ago) link
Model of unconscious desiring-production: giant egg [=body w/o organs] traversed by lines [=desiring-machines], with wandering point [=nomadic subject].
1.desiring-machines: a.psychological: fragmented body connected to parts of world b.psychoanalytic: partial objects c.logical: connective synthesis: and ... and then ... d.social: production proper: production of production
2.body w/o organs: a.psychological: catatonia b.psychoanalytic: death instinct, paranoia c.logical: disjunctive synthesis: either ... or ... or d.social: recording [=distribution and exchange]: anti-production
3.nomadic subject: a.psychological: multiple personality b.psychoanalytic: c.logical: conjunctive synthesis: so it's ... d.social: consumption: production of consumption-consummation
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Sunday, 28 May 2006 02:07 (fifteen years ago) link
before we waste too much time on your flame bait, I'm placing youunder moderation.(a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c)
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Sunday, 28 May 2006 15:03 (fifteen years ago) link
ssification of text i nto several c ategories (e.g. spam/non-spam email messages)
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 30 May 2006 02:04 (fifteen years ago) link
GG gets jumped by his just yukka Cherri Clip of Baby Fight This his Gynecology 1 God japs really fucking cute. You Erection cut it for some must such tight tight pants!Category: Iraqi how feels about it.Category: meant but he sure did!Category: lesbian erotic Shark & no Tea Bra sniffing, japs Surprisingly the small kid abandoned Cadillac with a on Allin Fight GG Shitter begging for Hepatitis! Quality I'll her later...Category: erotic of eye hurts!Category: fights is Riley This chick on Injection
Viagra just kinda hard to fight A and then tells the to seriously hurt this 28 porn! This is good fucking money shot.Category: yukka The Highschool Fight fatass.Category: Some kids blow up Babes the beach!Category: plugs loving This skank is 1 post some better clips kid a fight claiming that damn, wrong with their vaginas!?!?Category: can this website.Category: smut of
Punk Fight It fights soldier kills a wounded violent I don't think he fights minutes of real homemade Whale whale. Too bad there's piss Japs got it all.Category: holds fights Cadillac Bomb homemade Sexy topless chicks Allin fans!Category: fights Cunt degradation.Category: This is Cherri. Cry cries his way out Jap what in the fuck is see more of her doesn't the older folks!Category: yukka in Wounded Iraqi camera It Kinda Hurts kid, Amateur Lesbians shit!Category: That's one big Tampon drinking, and tampon tea. his ground against the an bomb! 36074 Views 51 Comments
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 30 May 2006 21:17 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 1 June 2006 02:26 (fifteen years ago) link
“当你不可能设法铭记其他和由什么获取他们的尊敬你是，并且，因为你达到; 当你有一点尊敬自己， 当缺乏这种感觉根本有它的地方在公司中， 有角色演奏那里和是重要的那里为其他， 投掷粉末的一个测试与眼睛由你想要伸长的财产。 许多为我们被提供答复这个浮华作用的对象： 汽车， 豪华衣物， 等“
“简单的生活 = 较少消耗量 为个人发展。"
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 1 June 2006 16:10 (fifteen years ago) link
facilitating global rights culture, a global culture of consent, universal basic health care, lifelong education, global basic income guarantees, strengthening and democratizing the United Nations, and such --
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 3 June 2006 01:15 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Sunday, 4 June 2006 03:04 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Monday, 5 June 2006 02:58 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 6 June 2006 02:39 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 02:13 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 04:00 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 8 June 2006 05:09 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 8 June 2006 13:50 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 8 June 2006 14:52 (fifteen years ago) link
I see signs of overconfidence in the younger supporters of healthy life extension; that is good if it drives action, but complacency would be the death of all of us if it spread. We have a chance, a shot at radical life extension. We have to contribute, all of us, or it will slip from between our fingers.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 10 June 2006 02:50 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Sunday, 11 June 2006 11:58 (fifteen years ago) link
Mais ce qu'on appelle une vie heureuse c'est faire tout ce qu'on peut, et ça Spinoza le dit formellement, pour précisément conjurer les morts prématurées, c'est à dire empêcher les morts prématurées. ça veut dire quoi? Pas du tout empêcher la mort, mais faire que la mort, lorsqu'elle survient, ne concerne finalement que la plus petite partie de moi-même. Voilà je crois, tel qu'il voyait, expérimentait et sentait les choses. Est-ce que vous avez des questions à poser, des réactions? Pas de théorie, rien que du sentiment!
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Sunday, 11 June 2006 22:11 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Monday, 12 June 2006 12:02 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Tuesday, 13 June 2006 13:46 (fifteen years ago) link
Codework is a practice, not a product.
It is praxis, part and parcel of the critique of everyday life.
It is not canonic, although it is taken as such.
It is not a genre, although it is taken as such.
The term is relatively new and should always be renewed.
We are suffused with code and its intermingling with surface phenomena.
Wave-trains of very low frequency radio pulses for example.
Phenomenology of chickadee calls.
Codework is not a metaphor, not metaphorical.
It exists precisely in the obdurate interstice between the real and thesymbolic. It exists in the arrow.
It is not a set of procedures or perceptions. It is the noise in thesystem. It is not the encapsulation or object of the noise or the system.
It is continuous; it is parasitic; it is thetic.
When it becomes metaphor, masterpiece, artwork, it is still-born; it isof no interest except as cultural residue: it is of great interest tocritics, gallerists, editors.
When it is not collectible, not a thing, virtual or otherwise, it is notof interest to critics, gallerists, editors.
Things have already taken up its name, as if pictures in an exhibition.
This is nothing more than the continuous reification, territorialization,conquest, of the real - as if the real were always already cleansed,available for the taking - as if the real were already transformed intocapital.
Capital is the encapsulation, objectification, of code. Capital drives thecode-conference, the code-book, the code-movement, the code-artist, thecode-masterpiece; capital drives the technology.
In short: Capital drives code into metaphor.
In short: Metaphor drives code into capital.
In short, but of greater difficulty: Capital drives metaphor into code.
In production, simpler: Metaphor drives capital into code.
The driving of metaphor, code, or capital is not codework.
Codework is the labor of code, subject to thermodynamics.
Codework is demonstrative, demonstrative fragment, experiment, partial-inscription, partial-object, the _thing_ prior to its presentation, thelinguistic kernel of the pre-linguistic. Code is the thetic, the gestural,of the demonstrative.
It the gesture that never quite takes. It is the noise inherent in thegestural.
However: Codework will become a _subject_ or a _sub-genre_ or a _venue_ oran _artwork_ or an _artist_ or a _dealer_ or a _collector._ However: Thisis not codework, or: What I describe above is not codework; after all,names are subsumed beneath the sign (Emblematic) of capital - as ifsomething is being accomplished. (Hackers who are not hackers areunhacked.)
To code is not to produce codework; it is to produce code on the level ofthe code or interface. Bridged code, embedded code, is not codework; theirreversible spew of cellular automata is codework, all the better if therules are noisy. The cultural production of codework abjures intensifica-tions, strange attractors, descriptions such as this (which is the oldestgame in the _book_). The hunt and reception of short-wave number codes iscodework. Writers on the edge are circumscribed by codework, malfunctionedpsychoanalytics, scatologies. Jews, Gypsies, Gays, Blacks, are endlesslycoded and decoded; the codes are dissolute, partial, always already incom-plete: the differend is codework.
To speak against the differend is codework; tumors are codework, metas-tases. The useless sequences of DNA, RNA.
Be wary of the violence of the legible text. Beware the metaphor whichinstitutionalizes, the text which defines, the text of positivities, notnegations, the circumscribing text, inscribing text; beware of theproducers and institutions of these texts, whose stake is in hardening ofdefinitions, control, capital, slaughter: Texts slaughter.
And texts slaughter texts.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 14 June 2006 02:56 (fifteen years ago) link
Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.These search terms have been highlighted: sondheim codework Page 1“Codework”—the computer stirring intothe text, and the text stirring the computer. Thisspecial topic presents several reviews of thecurrent state of a literary avant-garde concernedwith the intermingling of human and machine.“Code” can refer to just about anything thatcombines tokens and syntax to represent adomain. In a sense, natural language encodes the“real,” gives us the ability to move in environ-ments constantly undergoing transformation. Ina narrower sense, code refers to a translationfrom natural language to an artificial, strictlydefined one; the syntax of Morse code, forexample, has no room for anomalies orfuzziness. Computer programming gener-allyrequires strictly defined codes that stand in foroperations that occur “deeper” in the machine.Most users work on or within graphic surfacesthat are intricately connected to the program-ming “beneath”; they have little idea how orwhy their machines work.For thousands of years, writers have, againin general, taken their tools—taken writingitself—for granted. Even Sterne and Carrollwork within traditional means. The computerand Internet, however, have opened up a whole(and indefinable) world of possibilities. Theserange from writing itself to multimedia, andfrom writing-on-the-surface—traditional writingor hypertext—to texts, dynamic or static, thatreflect the bones, the molecules and atoms, ofprogramming and protocols—even the bones ofthe user’s computer, which may be accessed byvarious programs. I see codework as at least onefuture of writing—in part, it’s prosthetic, anuneasy combination of contents and structures.Using the metaphor of a tree, codework canbe placed within a very rough taxonomy asfollows:a. Works using the syntactical interplay ofsurface language, with reference to computerlanguage and engagement. These works mayCodeworkIntroduction:Alan Sondheim,Focus Editorplayfully utilize programming terminology andsyntax; they don’t necessarily refer to specificprograms. Examples include multi-media andhypertextual works—they’re the leaves andbouquet of the tree, the efflorescence. I think ofMez’s work in this regard, some of Antiorp’sstyle (but see below), and some of the InternetRelay Chat jargon endemic in various chats.b. Works in which submerged code hasmodified the surface language—with thepossible representation of the code as well.Here we have the potential for continuoussurface deformations. They’re the tendrils andbranchings of the tree, half surface and halfroot. Some of my own work fits here, as doesthe work of Ted Warnell. The language be-comes increasingly unreadable at times; it’s theresult of a group of processes and catalysts thatmay or may not be reworked. (I think of TalanMemmott’s work between a and b here.)c. Works in which the submerged code isemergent content; these are both adeconstruction of the surface and of the di-chotomy between the surface and the depth. Ithink of Antiorp’s and JODI’s dynamic sites forclassic examples. These works are therhizomatic roots of the tree (I recognize thebotanic problem here). In order to understandwhat’s going on, it helps to look at source code(which can be part of the content).“C” can also refer to aleatoric or random-ized work—haiku, language, or other poetry/poetic generators. Sometimes the work onlyappears randomized, and some times it’sentirely out of control. I think of John Cayley’swork here.All of these categories move betweenstatic productions (which may or may notCode refers to a translation fromnatural language to an artificial,strictly defined one.From ABR, September/October 2001, Volume 22, Issue 6Page 2be the residue, reworked residue, orsimulacrum of programs and/or programoutput) and dynamic processes—movement onthe screen, within or without the traditionalwindow or otherframework. Some-times the computercrashes, especiallywith category c—andthat’s part of thework, part of theprocess.I’m excited byall of this. It leads tovast uncharted do-mains (if that’s still ausable term) of newand future litera-tures—domains thatrecognize the vast changes that have occurredin human/machine interaction—changes thataffect the very notions of community andcommunality. Some of this work depends onnetwork distribution; some of it works prima-rily with a lone user at his or her computer. Theworks themselves may often be created throughcollaboration: no one really knows if Antiorp/Integer/etc. is one or many people; Mez uses apseudonym; and I work with a number of“emanants,” characters who are part me, partthemselves, part machine.This special topic presents five essaysdealing with codework. Belinda Barnet writeson Ted Nelson’s projects; Nelson is a pioneerin thinking about linked work, and his work isincreasingly important. Beatrice Beaubienwrites on Mez and Antiorp (nn / NN), present-ing a text of practice and theory that opens newgrounds for thinking through their work.Florian Cramer focuses on the nature ofsoftware, code, and the writing subject; thehistoric elements—thinking through HenryFlynt and Donald Knuth, for example—arecritical to currentwork. Talan Memmottfocuses on both thenature of codeworkand a number ofartists/writers—TedWarnell and BrianLennon, amongothers. He focuses oninscription and else-where has beendeveloping a phenom-enology of codework.McKenzie Warkdiscusses precursors to codework as well asextended writing; his examples include Mez,JODI, Kenji Siratori, and myself.I find these essays brilliant; they give avariety of theoretical approaches to a bodyof difficult work. They also extendcodework itself into territories of moretraditional media and the history of writing.I can only hope this introduction does themjustice.Alan Sondheim is Associate Editor of Beehive, co-moderates the Wryting and Cybermind e-mail lists,is teaching at Florida International University,lives in Brooklyn and Miami, has been workingon the Internet Text at http://www.anu.edu.au/English/internet_txt, was the Trace on-line writingcommunity’s second virtual writer-in-residence,and makes video/sound work on the side.“Virus 2” by Alan Sondheim
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 14 June 2006 04:16 (fifteen years ago) link
― lord pooperton (ex machina), Wednesday, 14 June 2006 05:14 (fifteen years ago) link
SCHOOL BUS= A DIRTY FEMALE (EVERYONE GETS A RIDE)
SCHOOL BUS=A DIRTY HOE(EVERYBODY GETS A RIDE)
NAST= SOMETHING THAT IS BAD
SPANK= SOMETHING VERY COOL
TRASH CANS=NICE REAR END
CD PLAYER: WHO KNOWS?
― lord pooperton (ex machina), Wednesday, 14 June 2006 05:15 (fifteen years ago) link
David M. Berry & Jo Pawlik
The two of us wrote this article together. Since each of us was several, there was already quite a crowd. We have made use of everything that came within range, what was closest as well as farthest away. We have been aided, inspired multiplied.
JP: Code is described as many things: it is a cultural logic, a machinic operation or a process that is unfolding. It is becoming,today's hegemonic metaphor; inspiring quasi-semiotic investigations within cultural and artistic practice (e.g. The Matrix). No-one leaves before it has set its mark on them...
DB: Yes, it has become a narrative, a genre, a structural feature of contemporary society, an architecture for our technologicallycontrolled societies (e.g. Lessig) and a tool of technocracy and of capitalism and law (Ellul/Winner/Feenberg). It is both metaphor and reality, it serves as a translation between different discourses and spheres, DNA code, computer code, code as law, cultural code, aristocratic code, encrypted code (Latour).
JP: Like the code to nourish you? Have to feed it something too.
DB: Perhaps. I agree that code appears to be a defining discourse of our postmodernity. It offers both explanation and saviour, for example, the state as machine, that runs a faulty form of code that can be rewritten and re-executed. The constitution as a microcode, law as code. Humanity as objects at the mercy of an inhuman code.
JP: True and it gathers together a disturbing discourse of the elect. Code as intellectual heights, an aristocratic elect who can free information and have a wisdom to transform society without the politics, without nations and without politicians. Code becomes the lived and the desired. Both a black box and a glass box. Hard and unyielding and simultaneously soft and malleable.
DB: Code seems to follow information into a displaced subjectivity, perhaps a new and startling subject of history that is merely a reflection of the biases, norms and values of the coding elite. More concerning, perhaps, code as walls and doors of the prisons and workhouses of the 21st Century. Condemned to make the amende honorable before the church of capital.
JP: So, we ask what is code? Not expecting to find answers, but rather to raise questions. To survey and map realms that are yet to come (AO:5). The key for us lies in code's connectivity, it is a semiotic-chain, rhizomatic (rather like a non-hierarchical network of nodes) and hence our map must allow for it to be interconnected from anything to anything. In this investigation, which we know might sometimes be hard to follow, our method imitates that outlined by Deleuze & Guattari in Anti-Oedipus (2004). It will analyse by decentering it onto other dimensions, and other registers (AO:8). We hope that you will view this article as a 'little machine' (AO: 4), itself something to be read slowly, or fast, so that you can take from it whatever comes your way. It does not ask the question of where code stops and the society starts, rather it forms a tracing of the code-society or the society-code.
DB: Dystopian and utopian, both can cling like Pincher Martin to code. Code has its own apocalyptic fictions; crashes and bugs, Y2K and corruption. It is a fiction that is becoming a literary fiction (Kermode). We wish to stop it becoming a myth, by questioning code and asking it uncomfortable questions. But by our questioning we do not wish to be considered experts or legislators, rather we want to ask again who are the 'Gods' of the information age (Heidegger). By drawing code out and stretching it out, we hope to make code less mysterious, less an 'unconcealment that is concealed' (Heidegger).
JP: Perhaps to ask code and coders to think again about the way in which they see the world, to move from objects to things, and practice code as poetry (poeisis). Rather than code as ordering the world, fixing and overcoding. Code as a craft, 'bringing-forth' through a showing or revealing that is not about turning the world into resources to be assembled, and reassembled forever.
DB: And let us not forget the debt that code owes to war and government. It has a bloody history, formed from the special projects of the cold war, a technological race, that got mixed up with the counter-culture but still fights battles on our behalf. He laid aside his sabre. And with a smile he took my hand.
--Code as concept--
DB: A stab in the dark. To start neither at the beginning or the end, but in the middle: code is pure concept instantiated into the languages of machines. Coding is the art of forming, inventing and fabricating structures based on these languages. Structures that constrain use as well as free. The coder is the friend of the code, the potentiality of the code, not merely forming, inventing and fabricating code but also desiring. The electric hymn book that Happolati invented. With electric letters that shine in the dark?
JP: And what of those non-coders who use code, or rather are used by code instead of forming it? Code can enable but it can also repress. Deleuze believes that we live in a society of control and that code is part 'of the numerical language of control' requiring of us passwords, user names, and the completion of form fields to either grant or deny access to information, goods and services (1992).
DB: Yes, code becomes the unavoidable boundary around which no detour exists in order to participate fully in modern life. It is ubiquitous. Formatted by code, harmonised with the language of machines, our life history, tastes, preferences and personal details become profiles, mailing lists, data and ultimately markets. Societies of control regulate their population by ensuring their knowing and unknowing participation in the marketplace through enforced compatibility with code. Watch over this code! Let me see some code!
JP: But there is no simple code. Code is production and as such is a machine. Every piece of code has components and is defined by them. It is a multiplicity although not every multiplicity is code. No code is a single component because even the first piece of code draws on others. Neither is there code possessing all components as this would be chaos. Every piece of code has a regular contour defined by the sum of its components. The code is whole because it totalises the components, but it remains a fragmentary whole.
DB: Code aborescent. Plato's building agile, object-oriented and postmodern codes under the spreading chestnut tree.
JP: But computers are not the only machines that use code. Deleuze believes that everything is a machine, or to be more precise every machine is a machine of a machine. By this he means that every machine is connected to another by a flow, whether this flow is air, information, water, desire etc. which it interrupts, uses, converts and then connects with another machine.
DB: I agree that human beings are nothing more than an assemblage of several machines linked to other machines, though century's worth of history have us duped into thinking otherwise.
JP: But, does every machine have a code built into it which determines the nature of its relations with other machines and their outputs? How else would we know whether to swallow air, suffocate on food or drink sound waves? There is even a social machine, whose task it is to code the flows that circulate within it. To apportion wealth, to organise production and to record the particular constellation of linked up flows that define its mode of being.
DB: Up to this point, code is verging towards the deterministic or the programmatic, dependent upon some form of Ur-coder who might be synonymous with God, with the Despot, with Nature, depending on to whom you attribute the first and last words.
JP: But Deleuze delimits a way of scrambling the codes, of flouting the key, which enables a different kind of de/en-coding to take place and frees us from a pre-determined input-output, a=b matrix. Enter Desire. Enter Creativity. Enter the Schizo. Enter capitalism? You show them you have something that is really profitable, and then there will be no limits to the recognition of your ability.
--Code as Schizo--
DB: Deleuze & Guattari warned us that the Schizo ethic was not a revolutionary one, but a way of surviving under capitalism by producing fresh desires within the structural limits of capitalism. Where will the revolution come from?
JP: It will be a decoded flow, a 'deterritorialised flow that runs too far and cuts too sharply'. D & G hold that art and science have a revolutionary potential. Code, like art and science, causes increasingly decoded and deterritorialised flows to circulate in the socius. To become more complicated, more saturated. A few steps away a policeman is observing me; he stands in the middle of the street and doesn't pay attention to anything else.
DB: But, code is bifurcated between a conceptual and a functional schema, an 'all encompassing wisdom [=code]'. Concepts and functions appear as two types of multiplicities or varieties whose natures are different. Using the Deluezean concept of Demon which indicates, in philosophy as well as science, not something that exceeds our possibilities but a common kind of these necessary intercessors as respective 'subjects' of enunciation: the philosophical friend, the rival, the idiot, the overman are no less demons that Maxwell's demon or than Einstein's or Heisenberg’s observers. (WIP: 129). Our eyes meet as I lift my head; maybe he had been standing there for quite a while just watching me.
JP: Do you know what time it is?
HE: Time? Simple Time?... Great time, mad time, quite bedeviled time, in which the fun waxes fast and furious, with heaven-high leaping and springing and again, of course, a bit miserable, very miserable indeed, I not only admit that, I even emphasise it, with pride, for it is sitting and fit, such is artist-way and artist-nature.
--Code and sense perception--
DB: In code the role of the partial coder is to perceive and to experience, although these perceptions and affections might not be those of the coder, in the currently accepted sense, but belong to the code. Does code interpolate the coder, or only the user? Ideal partial observers are the perceptions or sensory affections of code itself manifested in functions and 'functives', the code crystallised affect.
JP: Maybe the function in code determines a state of affairs, thing or body that actualises the virtual on a plane of reference and in a system of co-ordinates, a dimensional classification; the concept in code expresses an event that gives consistency to the virtual on a plane of immanence and in an ordered form.
DB: Well, in each case the respective fields of coding find themselves marked out by very different entities but that nonetheless exhibit a certain analogy in their task: a problem. Is this a world-directed perspective'code as an action facing the world?
JP: Does that not consisting in failing to answer a question? In adapting, in co-adapting, with a higher taste as problematic faculty, are corresponding elements in the process being determined? Do we not replicate the chains of equivalence, allowing the code, to code, so to speak, how we might understand it?
DB: Coders are writers, and every writer is a sellout. But an honest joy/Does itself destroy/For a harlot coy.
JP: We might ask ourselves the following question: is the software coder a scientist? A philosopher? Or an artist? Or a schizophrenic?
AL: For me the only code is that which places an explosive device in its package, fabricating a counterfeit currency. Which in part the knowing children sang to me.
Dr. K: This man is mad. There has been for a long time no doubt of it, and it is most regrettable that in our circle the profession of alienist is not represented. I, as a numismatist, feel myself entirely incompetent in this situation.
DB: For Deleuze, the ascription of these titles exceeds determining whether the tools of the trade in question are microscopes and test- tubes, cafes and cigarettes, or easels and oil-paints. Rather they identify the kind of thinking that each group practices. Latour claimed that if you gave him a laboratory he could move the world. Maybe prosopopoeia is part of the answer, he should ask code what it thinks.
JP: But not just the kind of thinking, but the kind of problems which this thought presupposes, and the nature of the solutions that it can provide. To ask under which category the coder clicks her mouse is to question whether she is creating concepts as opposed to dealing in functives like a scientist, or generating percepts and affects like an artist.
DB: If you're actually going to love technology, you have to give up sentimental slop, novels sprinkled with rose water. All these stories of efficient, profitable, optimal, functional technologies.
JP: Who said I wanted to love technology?
DB: The philosopher loves the concept. The artist, the affect. Do the coders love the code?
JP: If we say that code is a concept, summoning into being or releasing free software as an event, the coder is cast first andforemost as a philosopher. The coder, as philosopher, could neither love nor covet her code prior to its arrival. It must take her by surprise. For the philosopher, or more specifically the conceptual personae through whom concepts come to pass and are given voice, (Deleuze does not strictly believe in the creativity of an individual ego), Deleuze reserves a privileged role in the modern world which is so woefully lacking in creation and in resistance to the present. He writes: 'The creation of concepts in itself calls for a future form, for a new earth and people that do not yet exist' (1994, 108). Deleuze would hope this future form would be recognizable by virtue of its dislocation from the present.
DB: If the software coder really is a philosopher, what kind of a future is free software summoning and who are the new people who might later exist?
JP: Thanks to computers, we now know that there are only differences of degree between matter and texts. In fact, ever since a literary happy few started talking about 'textual machines' in connection with novels, it has been perfectly natural for machines to become texts written by novelists who are as brilliant as they are anonymous (Latour). But then is there no longer any difference between humans and nonhumans.
DB: No, but there is no difference between the spirit of machines and their matter, either; they are souls through and through (Latour).
JP: But don't the stories tell us that machines are purported to be pure, separated from the messy world of the real? Their internalworld floating in a platonic sphere, eternal and perfect. Is the basis of their functioning deep within the casing numbers tickingover numbers, overflowing logic registers and memory addresses?
DB: I agree. Logic is often considered the base of code. Logic is reductionist not accidentally but essentially and necessarily; itwants to turn concepts into functions. In becoming propositional, the conceptual idea of code loses all the characteristics it possessed as a concept: its endoconsistency and its exoconsistency. This is because of a regime of independence that has replaced that of inseparability, the code has enframed the concept.
--Code as science--
DB: Do you think a real hatred inspires logic's rivalry with, or its will to supplant, the concept? Deleuze thought 'it kills the concept twice over'.
JP: The concept is reborn not because it is a scientific function and not because it is a logical proposition: it does not belong to a discursive system and it does not have a reference. The concept shows itself and does nothing but show itself. Concepts are really monsters that are reborn from their fragments.
DB: But how does this relate to the code, and more specifically to free software and free culture? Can we say that this is thatsummoning? Can the code save us?
JP: Free software knows only relations of movement and rest, of speed and slowness, between unformed, or relatively unformed, elements, molecules or particles borne away by fluxes. It knows nothing of subjects but rather singularities called events or haecceities. Free software is a machine but a machine that has no beginning and no end. It is always in the middle, between things. Free software is where things pick up speed, a transversal movement, that undermines its banks and accelerates in the middle. But that is not to say that capital does not attempt to recode it, reterritorialising its flows within the circuits of capital.
DB: A project or a person is here only definable by movements and rests, speeds and slowness (longitude) and by affects, intensities (latitude). There are no more forms, but cinematic relations between unformed elements; there are no more subjects but dynamic individuations without subjects, which constitute collective assemblages. Nothing develops, but things arrive late or in advance, and enter into some assemblage according to their compositions of speed. Nothing becomes subjective but haecceities take shape according to the compositions of non-subjective powers and effects. Maps of speeds and intensities (e.g. Sourceforge).
JP: We have all already encountered this business of speeds and slowness: their common quality is to grow from the middle, to be always in-between; they have a common imperceptible, like the vast slowness of massive Japanese wrestlers, and all of a sudden, a decisive gesture so swift that we didn't see it.
DB: Good code, Bad code. Deleuze asks: 'For what do private property, wealth, commodities, and classes signify'? and answers: 'The breakdown of codes' (AO, 218). Capitalism is a generalized decoding of flows. It has decoded the worker in favour of abstract labour, it has decoded the family, as a means of consumption, in favour of interchangeable, faceless consumers and has decoded wealth in favour of abstract, speculative, merchant capital. In the face of this, it is difficult to know if we have too much code or too little and what the criteria might be by which we could make qualitative distinctions between one type of code and another, such as code as concept and code as commodity.
JP: We could suggest that the schizophrenic code (i.e. the schizophrenic coding as a radical politics of desire) could seek tode-normalise and de-individualise through a multiplicity of new, radical collective arrangements against power. Perhaps a radical hermeneutics of code, code as locality and place, a dwelling.
DB: Not all code is a dwelling. Bank systems, facial recognition packages, military defence equipment and governmental monitoring software is code but not a dwelling. Even so, this code is in the domain of dwelling. That domain extends over this code and yet is not limited to the dwelling place. The bank clerk is at home on the bank network but does not have shelter there; the working woman is at home on the code but does not have a dwelling place there; the chief engineer is at home in the programming environment but does not dwell there. This code enframes her. She inhabits them and yet does notdwell in them.
--Code as art--
JP: You are right to distinguish between code as 'challenging-forth' (Heidegger) and code that is a 'bringing-forth'. The code that is reterritorialised is code that is proprietary and instrumental, has itself become a form of 'standing-reserve'.
DB: So how are we to know when code is a 'bringing-forth'? How will we know if it is a tool for conviviality. How will we distinguish between the paranoiac and the schizophrenic?
JP: We know, that the friend or lover of code, as claimant does not lack rivals. If each citizen lays claim to something then we need to judge the validity of claims. The coder lays claim to the code, and the corporation, and the lawyer, who all say, 'I am the friend of code'. First it was the computer scientists who exclaimed 'This is our concern, we are the scientists!'. Then it was the turn of the lawyers, the journalists and the state chanting 'Code must be domesticated and nationalised!' Finally the most shameful moment came when companies seized control of the code themselves 'We are the friends of code, we put it in our computers, and we sell it to anyone'. The only code is functional and the only concepts are products to be sold. But even now we see the lawyers agreeing with the corporations, we must control the code, we must regulate the code, the code must be paranoiac.
DB: This is perhaps the vision offered by William Gibson's Neuromancer, a dystopian realization of the unchecked power of multinational corporations which, despite the efforts of outlaw subcultures, monopolize code. Through their creation of AI entities code becomes autonomous, it exceeds human control. If indeed it makes sense to retain the term human, which Gibson pejoratively substitutes with 'meat'. The new human-machinic interfaces engendered by software and technological development demand the jettisoning of received categories of existence as they invent uncanny new ones.
JP: This is the possibility of code. The code as a war machine. Nomadic thought. The code as outsider art, the gay science, code as desiring-production, making connections, to ever new connections.
DB: Code can be formed into networks of singularities into machines of struggle. As Capital de-territorializes code there is the potential through machines to re-territorialize. Through transformative constitutive action and network sociality in other words the multitude-code can be deterritorializing, it is multiplicity and becoming, it is an event. Code is becoming nomadic.
JP: This nomadic code upsets and exceeds the criteria of representational transparency. According to Jean Baudrillard, the omnipresence of code in the West—DNA, binary, digital—enables the production of copies for which there are no originals. Unsecured and cut adrift from the 'reality' which representation has for centuries prided itself on mirroring, we are now in the age of simulation. The depiction of code presents several difficulties for writers, who, in seeking to negotiate the new technological landscape, must somehow bend the representational medium of language and the linear process of reading to accommodate the proliferating ontological and spatio-temporal relations that code affords.
DB: This tension is as palpable in Gibson's efforts to render cyberspace in prose (he first coined the term in Neuromancer) as it is on the book cover, where the flat 2D picture struggles to convey the multi-dimensional possibilities of the matrix. The aesthetics of simulation, the poetics of cyberspace and of hyperreality are, we might say, still under construction.
JP: Perhaps code precludes artistic production as we know it. Until the artist creates code and dispenses with representational media altogether, is it possible that her work will contribute only impoverished, obsolete versions of the age of simulation?
DB: Artists have responded to 'code' as both form and content. As form, we might also think of code as 'genre', the parodying of which has become a staple in the postmodern canon. Films such as 'The Scream' series, 'The Simpsons', or 'Austin Powers';flaunt and then subvert the generic codes upon which the production and interpretation of meaning depends. More drastically, Paul Auster sets his 'New York Trilogy' in an epistemological dystopia in which the world does not yield to rational comprehension as the genre of detective fiction traditionally demands. If clues are totally indistinguishable from (co)incidental detail, how can the detective guarantee a resolution, how can order be restored? As Auster emphasizes, generic codes and aesthetic form underwrite ideological assumptions and can be described as the products of specific social relations.
JP: And what of code as content? Like the 'Matrix'. Here is a film which has latched onto the concept of code and also its discussion in contemporary philosophy, almost smugly displaying its dexterity in handling both.
DB: Or 'I Heart Huckabees' with its unfolding of a kind of existential code that underlies human reality. Are our interpretations shifting to an almost instrumental understanding of code as a form of weak structuralism? Philosophy as mere code, to be written, edited and improved, turned into myth so that our societies can run smoothly.
JP: The hacker stands starkly here. If code can be hacked, then perhaps we should drop a monkey-wrench in the machine, or sugar in the petrol tank of code? Can the philosopher be a model for the hacker or the hacker for the philosopher? Or perhaps the hacker, with the concentrations on the smooth, efficient hacks, might not be the best model. Perhaps the cracker is a better model for the philosophy of the future. Submerged, unpredictable and radically decentred. Outlaw and outlawed.
DB: Perhaps. But then perhaps we must also be careful of the fictions that we both read and write. And keep the radical potentialities of code and philosophy free.
Wet with fever and fatigue we can now look toward the shore and say goodbye to where the windows shone so brightly.
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 14 June 2006 06:01 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Wednesday, 14 June 2006 16:51 (fifteen years ago) link
other college phrases: "creative destruction," ceteris paribus. quo vadisres Arcadia ego"Drang nach Ostendas dritte ReichLebensraumKulturkampfsturm und drangBildungsromants: mise only thing that anyone ever knows about Thomas Kuhn)contraposto, of suture.see also: scopophilia, female as to-be-looked-atvigo, spengler, 'history class, whenever you see some statistic being thrown around whether it's being distorted or not."
BOOLEAN HIERARCHY IMPLICIT PARALLELISM, MUTUAL EXCLUSION, SEMAPHORE, ATOMIC OPERATION, (the dude who came up w/ the term "conspicuous the long run, we are all dead!")joseph schumpeter (the friedmanjohn kenneth galbraithjames buchananpaul krugman
economics -- the coase theorem!- ("OMG the limits of Western knowledge!!!")semiotics"to-be-looked-at-ness""queering of the..."phallo(go)centricthird worldISTthe of choice here)systems of significationthe uncannyconvergence, constructionism/essentialism, the digital ddd
the Naciremasearch: the pareto principle (aka "the 20/80 rule") theoryprisoners' dilemnathe phrases "moveable feast" (lit. majors) and "rational Hammadi library, 'The Fly Is About AIDS', Dziga Vertov, is "post hoc, ergo propter hoc." or something like ipsa loquiturexclusio uniusWeltschmerzWeltanschuungGötterdämmerungvis-a-vis, ergo, QEDars longa, vita brevis..."Et in en scene vs. mise en placepronunciamento"paradigm shift" (often the chiaroscuro,ionic, doric, corinthian.the glass ceilingsee also: phallic camera, theory moves in discreet cycles'Tristam Shandy."sublimationprojectionHerodotus, Thucydides, Gibbonperformativity "After this to make a point, you'll be able to tell FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING, TAIL-RECURSIVE FUNCTION, MEMORY COHERENCY MODEL, FINITE-STATE MACHINE,
adam smiththomas malthusdavid ricardokarl marxleon walrashenry georgethorstein veblen consumption")arthur pigoujohn maynard keynes (the guy who said "in dude who came up the term "creative destruction")paul samuelsonmilton ven diagramsthe madeleine in RechercheThe Milgram Experiment!Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: imperial imaginarygeographies of spectatorshipthe nature of the (insert medium divide, image politics cf. kennedy/nixon debate, "cf.".
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Thursday, 15 June 2006 02:33 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Friday, 16 June 2006 02:44 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 17 June 2006 02:49 (fifteen years ago) link
― S. (Sébastien Chikara), Saturday, 17 June 2006 19:03 (fifteen years ago) link
"They were famous pictures: Death on a Bicycle, Death Visits the
Amusement Park.... They'd been a fad in the 2050s, at the time of the
longevity breakthrough, when people realized that but for accidents
and violence, they could live forever. Death was suddenly a pleasant
old man, freed from his longtime burden. He rolled awkwardly along on
his first bicycle ride, his scythe sticking up like a flag. Children
ran beside him, smiling and laughing."
(Vernor Vinge, Marooned in Realtime)
― Sébastien, Friday, 1 June 2007 21:41 (fourteen years ago) link
Nature, through the trial and error of evolution, has discovered a
vast diversity of life from what can only presumed to have been a primordial
pool of building blocks. Inspired by this success, (...) is now trying to mimic
the process of Darwinian evolution in the laboratory by evolving new proteins
from scratch. Using new tricks of molecular biology, (...) have evolved several
new proteins in a fraction of the 3 billion years it took nature. Their most
recent results, (...) have led to some surprisingly new lessons on how to
optimize proteins which have never existed in nature before, (...).
― Sébastien, Saturday, 16 June 2007 05:06 (fourteen years ago) link
― 597, Saturday, 30 June 2007 13:45 (thirteen years ago) link
"Inert molecules from your cells! Chemical medicines won't reach that stuff, but the teleportation booth' does. It takes just those dead molecules and does the instant-elsewhere trick with them. Just the stuff that builds up over ninety years of life. See it now?"
"I don't feel any different," she said uncertainly.
"You should. I did. It was like I'd caught my second wind. Of course I was moving at a dead run. It's nothing obvious. What did you expect? In a couple of days you'll find dark roots in your hair."
― Sébastien, Sunday, 8 July 2007 22:56 (thirteen years ago) link
1. Advocating permaculture (resilient sustainability) -- we should be subsidizing research and practices of agroforestry, polyculture, organic and local agricultures, defending seed saving and seed sharing as basic human rights, regulating nonselective pesticide and high-energy-input, especially petrochemical fertilizer use, encouraging vegetarian, organic, local-food lifeways through accurate nutrition labeling, special taxes on food-corpses and highly salty, fatty, sugary processed foods, incentivizing climate-appropriate and edible landscaping, supporting organic, heirloom, and superorganic cultivation, vastly expanding research and development and infrastructure investment into p2p renewable energy-provision like decentralized solar grids and co-op windmill farms, energy-efficient appliances, desalination techniques, sustainable irrigation practices and biomimetic urban sewage treatment techniques, as well as passenger rail infrastructure across the world and facilitating non-automobile transportation in cities (free or small-fee distributed bike co-ops, for example, and transforming more urban car-lanes into pedestrian malls) -- increasing public awareness of and encouraging collective problem solving in the face of energy descent, overurbanization, species loss, extractive industrial depletion of topsoil and aquifers, toxicity of materials and industrial processes, waste/pollution, catastrophic human-caused climate change, and so on.
2. Advocating p2p (peer-to-peer formations) and a2k (access to knowledge) -- we should be strongly supporting net neutrality, institutionalizing creative commons, subsidizing personal blogging and peer credentialization/production practices, radically restricting global copyright scope and terms, expanding fair use provisions, providing public grants for noncommercial nonproprietary scientific research and access to creative expressivity and public performances, opening access to research and debate in science and the humanities, experimenting with science and public policy juries and networked townhalls, facilitating accessibility of information for differently enabled people (blind, partially blind, deaf, etc.), securing open knowledge transfer to people of the overexploited regions of the world, demanding transparency from authoritative institutions, especially governments, limited liability corporations, public universities, organizations funded by public resources or engaged in public services, strongly opposing institutional secrecy, especially corporatist proprietary secrets or militarist state secrets, ensuring universal free access to networked media, free reliable wifi, supporting community and minority-run radio, demanding corporate media disaggregation, facilitating small campaign donor aggregation and restricting other forms of patronage/lobbying/conflict-of-interest for elected representatives and professional appointees to public service, making access to education universal and free from pre-kindergarten through college, enacting strong whistleblower protections for public officials and corporate employees, introducing labeling standards to distinguish advertising, advocacy, journalism, and strengthening protections for consumers from fraudulent claims, and so on.
3. Advocating prosthetic self-determination (Pro Choice) -- we should be defending absolutely every woman's right to choose safe, free, accessible abortion techniques to end unwanted pregnancies, as well as facilitating wanted pregnancies with alternate reproductive techniques, legalizing and then taxing all informed, nonduressed consensual recreational drug use, redirecting public resources to policing actually dangerous or disorderly public conduct, regulating controlled substances for unnecessary harm, and expanding public education and drug rehabilitation programs, vastly expanding public research into genetic, prosthetic, and cognitive modification medicine, defending individuals and communities with atypical capacities and morphologies, expanding access (while prohibiting compulsory recourse) both to consensual medical and modification therapies as well as to reliable information about them, providing universal single-payer basic healthcare, planet-wide provision of safe water and nutritious food, and subsidizing access to all wanted therapies that meet basic threshold safety and transparency standards with a stakeholder grant for non-normalizing modifications in exchange for open access to clinical trial data associated with all experimental procedures.
4. Advocating BIG (basic income guarantees) -- we should be providing a universal, non means-tested basic guaranteed income to every person on earth as a foundational right of human civilization, not only to complete the traditional progressive project of ending slavery (including still existing wage slavery) and ending military conscription (including still existing conscription through the duress of the vulnerable, through poverty, illiteracy, stigmatized lifeways, and precarious legal status), and supporting collective bargaining (by providing a permanent strike fund for all workers) -- but also to combat contemporary and emerging and conspicuously amplifying forms of technodevelopmental abjection in particular: for example, current confiscatory wealth concentration through automation, outsourcing, and crowdsourcing; protecting vulnerable populations from duress to ensure all experimental medical decisions are truly consensual; and to champion p2p democracy by subsidizing the practices of true citizen participation, peer production of appropriate and appropriable technologies, and free open secular multiculture.
5. Advocating the democratization of global governance (democratic world federalism) -- the institutions of global governance already exists, of course, but in catastrophically non-democratic corporate-militarist forms that are destroying the world, and so the fight for democratic world federalist governance is not properly dismissed as a fanciful or dreadful desire for some ex nihilo planetary state, but in reality the fight to smash the corporate-militarist world state that actually exists and to democratize it as and for the people, peer-to-peer (in democracies, properly so-called, government is the people, and so to express hatred of government is to express hatred of the people and such slogans should be understood with that in mind), all in the face of unprecedented planetary problems and the unprecedented planetary consciousness created by global networked participation and in the light of our emerging awareness of global ecologic and economic interdependence -- and it doesn't matter to me whether this smashing of the state and democratization of global governance is implemented through the expansion and democratic reform of the United Nations, or through the creation of alternate or supplementary planetary institutions, many pathways will present themselves to do this work -- but it will likely take a federal form, encompassing already existing formations, a form emphasizing subsidiarity (which is a principle directing governance always to the most local layer adequate to a shared problem), and protecting planetary secular multiculture, and directed to the tasks of monitoring global storms, pandemics, weapons, enforcing global environmental, labor, police/military conduct standards, providing institutional recourse for the nonviolent resolution of interpersonal and intergovernmental disputes, and facilitating the universal scene of legible, informed, nonduressed consent.
― Sébastien, Tuesday, 20 November 2007 02:25 (thirteen years ago) link
My guess is that in the long-term there will be pressure to leave the earth to its unpredictable weather patterns. Most people will live in reclaimed environments, e.g., space stations or tera-formed planets. These artificial environments may have a random element introduced into their weather patterns, but they probably won't have the retro feel of earth. I think I like the idea of people visiting the earth only as we might visit a national park. There would be no or few permanent residents. Rather we might stay a few days and try not to leave to big a footprint and then return to our tamed environments in space
― Sébastien, Tuesday, 20 November 2007 10:38 (thirteen years ago) link
LifeNet project: volunteer network that goes where-ever there are firestations and police stations. The goal is to minimize the amount of time to reach anybody who dies on the continent within 30 minutes and to cryogenically store them (they are already "dead": they might never know). Calculations show that there would need to be at least 150k locations and that there is one death every 14 hours per 50 km^2 average in USA.
― Sébastien, Wednesday, 21 November 2007 15:29 (thirteen years ago) link
― Crêpe, Thursday, 6 December 2007 03:15 (thirteen years ago) link
I associate "intense" with bearded college-sophomore hippie dudes who say "deep" stuff about energy and the universe and make too much eye contact and then 18-year-old girls who just showed up from Midwestern high schools are like "that guy was so intense"
Sebastien Chikara is "intense," see?
lul, energy? then I thought :
"On October 10, 2007, leading space advocacy organizations and Apollo astronaut Buzz Aldrin will announce the formation of a new alliance to "ensure that the benefits of renewable clean energy from space solar power are understood and supported by business, governments and the general public," according to an alliance statement.
The inaugural event of the new alliance, to be held at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. at 9:00 am, will highlight a study underway by the National Security Space Office (NSSO) on the viability of space-based solar power, presented by Lt. Col. Paul Damphousse, National Security Space Office. John Mankins, President, SUNSAT Energy Council, a leading expert on space solar power, will also speak.
According to the organizers, media and Congressional staff who wish to attend can email Katherine Brick at kather✧✧✧.br✧✧✧@n✧✧.o✧✧.
Space solar power refers to gathering energy in space and transmitting it wirelessly for use on Earth. This technology could be a major solution to humanity's long-term energy needs, providing limitless renewable power with zero carbon emissions, according to Mankins and other experts."
― Sébastien, Saturday, 15 December 2007 16:42 (thirteen years ago) link
If it succeeds, Microsoft's planned parallel-computing software, designed to take advantage of new manycore chips -- processors with more than eight cores, possible as soon as 2010 -- could bring as much as a hundredfold computing speed-up in solving some problems.
Likely to be timed to the arrival of "Windows 7," it would allow even hand-held devices to see, listen, speak and make complex real-world decisions -- in the process, transforming computers from tools into companions.
― Sébastien, Wednesday, 19 December 2007 15:53 (thirteen years ago) link
That was a good thread.
― baaderonixx, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 11:39 (thirteen years ago) link
Are there any political philosophers you consider to be science
fictional? I'm thinking of how Karl Marx talks a lot about things
happening in his future Utopia - fishing in the afternoon and
philosophizing in the evening and all that. But there's obviously a lot
of these sorts of speculations going on in any political philosophy that
cares about the future. Any political theory or theorist in particular
that you find compelling as SF?
Actually, Marx talks very little about future society. Even that famous
quote comes from an unpublished work. Marx's most science-fictional
vision is of 'the automatic factory' - for Marx, reducing the amount of
time spent in boring, unfulfilling work is the basis for human freedom.
Freedom begins when the working day ends. It's all very current and it's
all right there in Capital. I've speculated elsewhere that Marx's
approach to society - look at what's emerging, look at the technology,
look at the underlying conflicts that these bring out - may have in some
vulgarised form actually inspired the emergence of science fiction
itself. Science fiction is an adventure playground in the materialist
conception of history.
― Sébastien, Friday, 18 January 2008 05:08 (thirteen years ago) link
After he disappeared she'd go to the park they met at years ago, sit and watch the couples go by and wait for his return. Sometimes she'd dressin what she'd been wearing on that day. Sometimes try a different bench or a different direction in the hot sun in Khartoum. She'd look for his smile in angry crowds, in indifferent strangers exiting restaurants down small side streets with anagram names, and it would still be boiling hot when she'd return home and flush his cold dinner down the toilet. And after a while people stopped noticing her. They stopped paying attention. They stopped shaking their heads, saying, "He's never coming back you know." "No, he's never coming back."
― Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Tuesday, 22 January 2008 08:49 (thirteen years ago) link
On the galactic setting where the Culture exists:
The galaxy (our galaxy) in the Culture stories is a place long
lived-in, and scattered with a variety of life-forms. In its vast and
complicated history it has seen waves of empires, federations,
colonisations, die-backs, wars, species-specific dark ages,
renaissances, periods of mega-structure building and destruction, and
whole ages of benign indifference and malign neglect. At the time of the
Culture stories, there are perhaps a few dozen major space-faring
civilisations, hundreds of minor ones, tens of thousands of species who
might develop space-travel, and an uncountable number who have been
there, done that, and have either gone into locatable but insular
retreats to contemplate who-knows-what, or disappeared from the normal
universe altogether to cultivate lives even less comprehensible.
On the ships and their Minds:
Culture starships - that is all classes of ship above
inter-planetary - are sentient; their Minds (sophisticated AIs working
largely in hyperspace to take advantage of the higher lightspeed there)
bear the same relation to the fabric of the ship as a human brain does
to the human body . . . The Culture's largest vessels - apart from
certain art-works and a few Eccentrics - are the General Systems
Vehicles of the Contact section. (Contact is the part of the Culture
concerned with discovering, cataloguing, investigating, evaluating and -
if thought prudent - interacting with other civilisations; its rationale
and activities are covered elsewhere, in the stories.) The GSVs are fast
and very large craft, measured in kilometres and inhabited by millions
of people and machines. The idea behind them is that they represent the
Culture, fully. All that the Culture knows, each GSV knows; anything
that can be done anywhere in the Culture can be done within or by any
GSV. In terms of both information and technology, they represent a last
resort, and act like holographic fragments of the Culture itself, the
whole contained within each part.
The Culture doesn't actually have laws; there are, of course,
agreed-on forms of behaviour; manners, as mentioned above, but nothing
that we would recognise as a legal framework. Not being spoken to, not
being invited to parties, finding sarcastic anonymous articles and
stories about yourself in the information network; these are the normal
forms of manner-enforcement in the Culture.
Politics in the Culture consists of referenda on issues whenever
they are raised; generally, anyone may propose a ballot on any issue at
any time; all citizens have one vote. Where issues concern some
sub-division or part of a total habitat, all those - human and machine -
who may reasonably claim to be affected by the outcome of a poll may
cast a vote. Opinions are expressed and positions on issues outlined
mostly via the information network (freely available, naturally), and it
is here that an individual may exercise the most personal influence,
given that the decisions reached as a result of those votes are usually
implemented and monitored through a Hub or other supervisory machine,
with humans acting (usually on a rota basis) more as liaison officers
than in any sort of decision-making executive capacity; one of the few
rules the Culture adheres to with any exactitude at all is that a
person's access to power should be in inverse proportion to their desire
On why most people in the Culture live in Orbitals:
The attraction of Orbitals is their matter efficiency. For one
planet the size of Earth (population 6 billion at the moment; mass
6x1024 kg), it would be possible, using the same amount of matter, to
build 1,500 full orbitals, each one boasting a surface area twenty times
that of Earth and eventually holding a maximum population of perhaps 50
billion people (the Culture would regard Earth at present as
over-crowded by a factor of about two, though it would consider the
land-to-water ratio about right). Not, of course, that the Culture would
do anything as delinquent as actually deconstructing a planet to make
Orbitals; simply removing the sort of wandering debris (for example
comets and asteroids) which the average solar system comes equipped with
and which would threaten such an artificial world's integrity through
collision almost always in itself provides sufficient material for the
construction of at least one full Orbital (a trade-off whose
conservatory elegance is almost blissfully appealing to the average
Mind), while interstellar matter in the form of dust clouds, brown
dwarfs and the like provides more distant mining sites from which the
amount of mass required for several complete Orbitals may be removed
with negligible effect.
― Sébastien, Wednesday, 13 February 2008 18:39 (thirteen years ago) link
1. Declare the internet a public good in the same way we think of water, electricity, highways or public education.
2. Commit to providing affordable high-speed wireless Internet access nationwide.
3. Declare a “Net Neutrality” standard forbidding Internet service providers from discriminating among content based on origin, application or type.
4. Instead of “No Child Left Behind,” our goal should be “Every Child Connected.”
5. Commit to building a Connected Democracy where it becomes commonplace for local as well as national government proceedings to be heard by anyone any time and over time.
6. Create a National Tech Corps, because as our country becomes more reliant on 21st century communications to maintain and build our economy we need to protect our communications infrastructure.
We've spent some time looking through the candidates' policy statements on technology, the media, education, transparency and infrastructure
― Sébastien, Wednesday, 13 February 2008 18:40 (thirteen years ago) link
to connect p2p/a2k
(peer-to-peer/access to knowledge) technoscience politics to the
politics of permaculture practices and to the politics of pro-choice
consensual non-normalizing biomedicine.
― Sébastien, Thursday, 19 June 2008 04:54 (thirteen years ago) link
The terraces, forming an outdoor terrain that extends over the whole surface of the city
― Sébastien, Sunday, 20 July 2008 04:10 (twelve years ago) link
― gzip, Friday, 25 July 2008 10:08 (twelve years ago) link
― Sébastien, Saturday, 26 July 2008 03:14 (twelve years ago) link
― ╬☉д⊙, Saturday, 4 October 2008 00:15 (twelve years ago) link
good clear picture of [CapitalistMan]http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/148/imgadz.gif
― Sébastien, Monday, 7 December 2009 07:14 (eleven years ago) link
a a a a a a a a melody got me a a a a a a a a melody got me a a a melody got me are we are we melody got me are are melody got me don don a dont dont melody got me dont e a a dont e dont ev melody got me dont eve dont even dont even worryabout a thing
about a thing
― plaxico (I know, right?), Monday, 15 February 2010 20:44 (eleven years ago) link
The ideal for a book would be to lay everything out on a plane of exteriority of this kind, on a single page, the same sheet: lived events, historical determinations, concepts, individuals, groups, social formations.
― Sébastien, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 01:38 (ten years ago) link
What is Codework?
It exists precisely in the obdurate interstice between the real and the symbolic. It exists in the arrow.
It is not a set of procedures or perceptions. It is the noise in the system. It is not the encapsulation or object of the noise or the system.
When it becomes metaphor, masterpiece, artwork, it is still-born; it is of no interest except as cultural residue: it is of great interest to critics, gallerists, editors.
When it is not collectible, not a thing, virtual or otherwise, it is not of interest to critics, gallerists, editors.
This is nothing more than the continuous reification, territorialization, conquest, of the real - as if the real were always already cleansed, available for the taking - as if the real were already transformed into capital.
Capital is the encapsulation, objectification, of code. Capital drives the code-conference, the code-book, the code-movement, the code-artist, the code-masterpiece; capital drives the technology.
Codework is demonstrative, demonstrative fragment, experiment, partial- inscription, partial-object, the thing prior to its presentation, the linguistic kernel of the pre-linguistic. Code is the thetic, the gestural, of the demonstrative.
It the gesture that never quite takes. It is the noise inherent in the gestural.
However: Codework will become a subject or a sub-genre or a venue or an artwork or an artist or a dealer or a collector. However: This is not codework, or: What I describe above is not codework; after all, names are subsumed beneath the sign (Emblematic) of capital - as if something is being accomplished. (Hackers who are not hackers are unhacked.)
To code is not to produce codework; it is to produce code on the level of the code or interface. Bridged code, embedded code, is not codework; the irreversible spew of cellular automata is codework, all the better if the rules are noisy. The cultural production of codework abjures intensifications, strange attractors, descriptions such as this (which is the oldest game in the book). The hunt and reception of short-wave number codes is codework. Writers on the edge are circumscribed by codework, malfunctioned psychoanalytics, scatologies. Jews, Gypsies, Gays, Blacks, are endlessly coded and decoded; the codes are dissolute, partial, always already incomplete: the differend is codework.
To speak against the differend is codework; tumors are codework, metastases. The useless sequences of DNA, RNA.
Be wary of the violence of the legible text. Beware the metaphor which institutionalizes, the text which defines, the text of positivities, not negations, the circumscribing text, inscribing text; beware of the producers and institutions of these texts, whose stake is in hardening of definitions, control, capital, slaughter: Texts slaughter.
And texts slaughter texts.NavigationHome Projects cyhist KnowledgeBase Syllabus Archive Plaintext Tools About the CLCLog inNamePasswordForgot your password?New user?
― Sébastien, Sunday, 15 May 2011 01:03 (ten years ago) link
We want to save the Earth's biosphere, settle the oceans and space, end hunger and poverty, utilize alternative sources of energy, bring about a better democracy and economy to the world, and generally provide a standard of living and quality of life far beyond anything mankind has ever experienced. http://www.luf.org/
--The Millennial Project 2.0
The Millennial Project is a comprehensive plan for space development, beginning with the terrestrial cultivation of an environmentally sustainable civilization and Post-Industrial culture and culminating, far in the future, in the colonization of our immediate stellar neighborhood. The TMP2 project is specifically a project of the Living Universe Foundation community to continually update and revise the content of the original plan as described by Marshal T. Savage in his book The Millennial Project.
--At The Seasteading Institute, we work to enable seasteading communities - floating cities - which will allow the next generation of pioneers to peacefully test new ideas for government. The most successful can then inspire change in governments around the world.
--OSCOMAK supports playful learning communities of individuals and groupschaordically building free and open source knowledge, tools, and simulationswhich lay the groundwork for humanity's sustainable development on Spaceship Earth andeventual joyful, compassionate, and diverse expansion into space(including Mars, the Moon, the Asteroids, or elsewhere in the Universe).--
― Sébastien, Thursday, 30 June 2011 01:47 (nine years ago) link
The Open Source Ecology wiki,home of the Global Village Construction Set,developing community-based solutions for re-inventing local production.
RepRap is about making self-replicating machines, and making them freely available for the benefit of everyone. We are using 3D printing to do this, but if you have other technologies that can copy themselves and that can be made freely available to all, then this is the place for you too.
― Sébastien, Thursday, 30 June 2011 02:12 (nine years ago) link
My friend, I have no problem with the thought of a galactic civilization vastly unlike our own... full of strange beings who look nothing like me even in their own imaginations... pursuing pleasures and experiences I can't begin to empathize with... trading in a marketplace of unimaginable goods... allying to pursue incomprehensible objectives... people whose life-stories I could never understand.
― Sébastien, Thursday, 30 June 2011 23:56 (nine years ago) link
>/ 50 don't make no money. U gotta side with the jews. [ Cut to a room, fancy hotel, Gerber-blanc & mauve. A contemporary is in the game for billions. ]
[Credits] digital on Gabbapention[ A ball. ]
― Parade (a you), Friday, 1 July 2011 00:01 (nine years ago) link
― test 2, Thursday, 7 July 2011 02:09 (nine years ago) link
clashes [...] between careerism as a means of actualizing and subverting the self, establish the voice of creativity as a vulnerable protagonist that is taken under fire by the chaos.
― Sébastien, Thursday, 7 July 2011 15:24 (nine years ago) link
actualizing an imagined scroll of the Cyrenaic school, a dialog at the wake of Aristippus of Cyrene.
― Sébastien, Saturday, 16 July 2011 17:25 (nine years ago) link
Never mind humanist, postmodernism may well be the last cultural movement that's 100% human.
You may laugh at this prediction now, but you won't laugh in 2012: the point at which postmodernism turns into posthumanism is the moment when Arnold Schwartzenegger becomes president of the US. That's the point at which the pomo fight between the authentic and the fake morphs into the posthuman fight between flesh and digital flesh.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 30 October 2004 07:05 (8 years ago) PermalinkWhat I mean is that he will be elected to 'terminate' Islamic fundamentalism, a dialectic that will by that point be a bit tired, but that he will actually be the first 'terminator president', and herald in an age of unprecedented man-machine combination.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 30 October 2004 07:09 (8 years ago) PermalinkAnd if you ask me what will the cultural life be like in that new posthuman world, I'd say that, just as there as continuities between modernism and postmodernism, so there will be continuities between the postmodern and the posthuman. The rockist questions about authenticity will not go away -- in fact, they'll become, if anything, more central. But with a twist: it will be the clones and machines which will harp on most on authenticity and humanity, whereas the humans will insist on artificiality. The future (and you read it here first, folks!) is Robot Rockism.
― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 30 October 2004 07:46 (8 years ago) Permalink
― Sébastien, Monday, 27 May 2013 01:09 (eight years ago) link
― am0n, Tuesday, 11 June 2013 20:47 (eight years ago) link
― ttyih boi (crüt), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 03:08 (eight years ago) link