nettime mailinglist

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----Hash: SHA256FYI, from the Free Culture Forum discussion list- ----- Forwarded message -----"I just called to say I want to read" David Hammerstein, TransAtlantic Consumer DialogueRunning away from Stevie Wonder in Geneva Stevie Wonder spoke and sang before the World Intellectual PropertyOrganization (WIPO) General Assembly this week in Geneva in favour ofending the "book famine" for the visually impaired. He passionatelychallenged the international community to take action to guaranteeright to read for millions of print disabled around the world. Manyof us were moved by his words and music but others remainedindifferent, especially some European countries like France. In fact,when Spain and other EU members proposed to issue a statement sayingthat the EU "accepts the challenge posed by Stevie Wonder" to increasethe access to reading material for blind persons, the Frenchrepresentatives flatly refused to accept any mention of Stevie Wonderdue to their copyright fundamentalism. For Sarkozys France it seems that no flexibility or exceptions arepossible. In their all out war in defense of copyright "no prisonerswill be taken". France and other countries like Germany insisted thatthere shouldnt be any shadow of doubt concerning the total rejectionby the European Union of the World Blind Unions proposal for a Treatyfor the Visually Impaired and Print Disabled that has been sponsoredby Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay and Mexico. It is quite surprising thatcountries like France that have clear legal exceptions to copyrightfor the visaully impaired inside their countries do not wish to extendthis norm to the rest of the world so that formatted works could flowto the millions print-disabled of the South. At the same time EU countries and the US were dragging their feeton confronting the "Book Famine" of the print-disabled in Geneva,their chief negotiators were hard at work in secret talks "16 hours aday" in Tokyo, hammering out the last details of the ACTA agreementthat proposes very strict and repressive enforcement measures ofcopyright and patents. In contrast, It seems that when it comes tohelping one of the most disadvantaged groups in the world, thevisually impaired, there is no sense of urgency and no need to takelegally binding measures. On IP issues the EU and the US practice a"carrot and stick" diplomacy with lots of big sticks "to fight piracy"and very few small carrots for the access to culture, education andtechnology transfer. In our view they are eroding the credibility ofinternational IP governance by exclusively focussing on protecting theaccumulated rights and vested interests of a few Northern businessmodels while giving a cold shoulder to new innovative industries,consumers, internet users and citizens of the global South. Instead of the legally binding treaty brilliantly and passionatelydefended by Latin American diplomats, the EU prefers voluntary"stakeholder" agreements that depend on the "good will" and "self-regulation" of publishers and rights-holders in order solve thecopyright barriers suffered by the visually impaired. (In contrast,this week the EU and the US supported legal treaties at WIPO forbroadcasters and audio-visual performers). Both the EU and the USfeel it would be "a dangerous precedent" to open the gate to legallimitations and exceptions to copyright, even if it is for blindpersons non-profit organizations. They are sure that if this proposalgoes forward, other legal exceptions will be proposed by Africa forlibraries, archives and textbooks in what they call "the slipperyslope" toward the weakening of international copyright law. On thecontrary, supporters of flexibilities of copyright believe that fairexceptions could improve the general credibility and social acceptanceof copyright governance. "I just called to say I want to read" might be the title of StevieWonders next song. Wonder told WIPO that if they do not act he wouldbe forced to write a song "about what they didnt do". The fight for the "right to read" is gaining momentum and gettingstronger around the world. By the time the issue is considered atWIPO in November at the Standing Committee on Copyright and RelatedRights (SCCR) there are some signs that real progress will be made toset a road-map for a fairer copyright system that places the plight ofmillions of people before the supposed business interests of a few. Wejust all need to push a little harder.- -----+info http://list.fcforum.net/wws/info/fcforum_discussion- ----- ----- End forwarded message ----------BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)iQQcBAEBCAAGBQJMnzTMAAoJEAslGzkIl3JRklcf/jzsbyngrEQ14N8cU1s+oaa275CHq+0J++KHERQA44Yt/d8S9ppjNtD1kUUTHMd//0t3TsJpdw7AO/OFwAUiGGMxGB63kmlbU0oHrN65GNNoDgTq9ipkRDNZekV3eoDRlQOkBRFk9M3INY0fUpTz/n9qqaRRcplV9iU2SxbzN0Cnem/fj8phcB74WqnBddr56eJI7s1pSCcYRVpHW0Dt4khsBAD8IQ8d56S49CJk7rgy8gtLeJl2qTTacqrT4P2z+6tdMP5UPumQQ8j5gZOyFZsuGmTuEhXeMQr8Ke9N/4SW/pd7AXQq4esbQuUk3lvS1cz9KCcAwlq65YB3Dy/VJcw/dLGFm7Jyi+PPD/l7CR2P1D3e+tkZj++yTHeWXWb5EC63RtnMkMXwcJij8kJ+S96JDtt9gAMaagQfng5sOdmtDM2x+xiuZj7O63GkTPwt1+fE4IMgR8zNOV8kpYL8sGxafPg0a0pxkkZzn+H4+xw/PAOprBrcKo4S+0anj9jkQdl+FvPQEB+s07MOTovBCsHkMr9nK6ELnf3kmGafbkroRXcWNC6qDf5zS9tk6uR8fbwHQuDojog2EW9t7SSNGj9agC4vehikJu1pDizQiqlln3XL/l+bcKE/vtpPnZsPJyaNkIFm1IoQGHeu+eWZiv0mqOv8Z+a+unGJty/Ha3MBkwYYyldtpc2m0c3L9ualbNjEK58JXfSyGeil8lGJ1V3taB5D5ELc71jh7wlZCNdRkdcZzbCS1XKFoA9lVfw40y06KjcSKTfmAPaGXulT/G0jpUoGG1q0ajYsjIK+lV20p9CisC5/jiUCBVzc59q7xlJxJbdQhH+4zTH3KwvmXYDt8mJWAsFVNW4Gk/8AP0NITxU4H8yHJ+F/Fhb43jL4BAhs4ZpuJQ9mZYTlYcKMYsQhereoDAh9kbRElDJ/pzLFyfFMb0iACIPM+cbtQAOxfi4A+MdicxlneDe4IUlDIql9gnkgATlb6G+840CGZb9A/vtcDF+f++KZ3agK85iK1+kvEPn9Mggwrv/xXkcPJZc7kem0X4SvCH3QqZx7mvpyeuaKZ3L7PYqXy407UlOLIGcTWdxugOeANIMqWAc258CamB6iQOrA+mKcZP4+/MA6ee+k1UhpliA+9ps4+6G5LovPoi/joADzWE2o6tMCODL9a4oJrHMxgiuPLqT+wPHIZmZ0tYPeAKTgUavhOHbyHJJdbLUTnbAfLSVLorBVMwAYJ1FY6LSFuzaKbVQd9k47TodpgdusSEfWKC205/TAgGx7BlBBynVXucnq2vCIquUq4J0xeUgz7hoHgy3vlrMc89aiHzFLNO0RRZSppHFo6sIyDCQ8sq/RlXwq+KofOcs==IYsz-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Lamps that could enlighten the masses: Van de Nieuwelaar 1968 & Joe Colombo1962September 26, 2010 by Tjebbe van Tijenthe illustrated article with links can be found athttp://limpingmessenger.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/lamps-that-could-enlighten-the-masses-van-de-nieuwelaar-1968-joe-colombo-1962/[picture of the two lamps from 1968 & 1962)Newspaper read this morning: Dutch designer Aldo van de Nieuwelaar (1944-2010)died and I did not remember his name, but when I saw one of his designs de TC6lamp from 1968 I immediately remembered it for its elegant austerity? Alwayshad a sensitivity for industrial design which finds it base in living in acommune with three industrial design students early sixties, so another lampwas switched on in my memory by the Milano designer Joe Colombo (1930-1971): apiece of bended plexiglass transporting the source of light through itssculptural curve, designed in 1962. I well remember me visiting his studio in1965 when I was a young student in Milano and being introduced to him because Iwanted to use plexiglass for one of my sculptures. I needed to bend a fat slabof plexiglass and Colombo knew how that could be done and where.Both lamp designs were meant for a mass market and not for the happy few. Atthat time there was this utopian view of nice and sincere industrial productsto literally ?enlighten? the living spaces of everyone? alas they can only befound now as ?vintage designs? in exclusive shops of specialised dealers and indesign museum? or? Well I should scout for them for my own home but only at anon speculative price for an industrial product (time for a study how massproducts are ?exclusified? in the vintage design market) ? untll found as ahomage to the good intention of these designers a twin picture of their lamps?Tjebbe van Tijen

La Quadrature du Net - For immediate releasePermanent link: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/acta-game-overACTA: Game Over?*** Paris, September 24th 2010 - The Tokyo round of negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement has just begun. It could be the last one before the signature of the final agreement. The text, which is now close to completion, remains an alarming threat on fundamental freedoms online, and could lead to the generalization of anti-democratic legislation and governance. ***The latest leaked text - dated August 25th - of ACTA still contains provisions calling for closer cooperation between Internet Service Providers and rights holders [1], favored by legal and monetary pressure put on Internet technical intermediaries (access and service providers, ISPs) [2].These repressive and dangerous policies in ACTA are consistent with the position of EU institutions, who are also pushing for extra-legislative and extra-judicial measures to deal with online file sharing. According to the Commission, backed up by the Members of the European Parliament who voted in favor of the Gallo report, "Rights holders and other stakeholders should be encouraged to exploit the potential of collaborative approaches and to place more emphasis on joining forces to combat counterfeiting and piracy in the common interest, also taking advantage of possible alternatives to court proceedings for settling disputes" [3]."ACTA pushes for the creation of private copyright police and justice of the Net, in negation of the right to a fair trial. Such policies would inevitably affect both freedom of expression and privacy." declares Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson of the citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net.Article 5 and 6 of ACTA, finalized unlike most of the text, create an "ACTA committee" which will play a key role in processing subsequent amendments to the agreement, subject to forms of approval by the parties that are defined in ambiguous terms. This procedure risks amounting to the creation of a parallel legislative process bypassing public opinion and democracy."ACTA is an experiment in the circumvention of democracy. Even if the most offensive provisions become less visible in the final text, ACTA must be rejected as such. If we tolerate it, we will create a precedent and Parliaments will be pressured to rubber stamp packages negotiated without democratic debate." concludes Zimmermann.* Références *1. See article 2.18.3: "Each Party shall endeavor to promote cooperative efforts within the business community to effectively address intellectual property rights infringement (...)"2. Article 2.x before article 2.2 in the "civil enforcement" chapter3. See p. 10 of the communication of September 11th, 2009, regarding the enforcement of intellectual property rights: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/docs/ip-09-1313/communication_en.pdf** About la Quadrature du Net **La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that promotes the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge. In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the digital age.La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and Privacy International.List of supporting organisations : http://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-squaring-net-la-quadrature-du-net** Press contact and press room **Jérémie Zimmermann, jz-IaIWC/tzMHqakcBq96p2dA< at >public.gmane.org, +33 (0)615 940 675http://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room

bwo Eveline Lubbers with thankshttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?_r=1&th=&emc=th&pagewanted=allU.S. Is Working to Ease Wiretaps on the InternetBy CHARLIE SAVAGEPublished: September 27, 2010WASHINGTON — Federal law enforcement and national security officialsare preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet,arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspectsis “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead ofby telephone.Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services thatenable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters likeBlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and softwarethat allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to betechnically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. Themandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encryptedmessages.The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakersnext year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needswith protecting privacy and fostering innovation. And because securityservices around the world face the same problem, it could set anexample that is copied globally.James X. Dempsey, vice president of the Center for Democracy andTechnology, an Internet policy group, said the proposal had “hugeimplications” and challenged “fundamental elements of the Internetrevolution” — including its decentralized design.“They are really asking for the authority to redesign services thattake advantage of the unique, and now pervasive, architecture of theInternet,” he said. “They basically want to turn back the clock andmake Internet services function the way that the telephone system usedto function.”But law enforcement officials contend that imposing such a mandate isreasonable and necessary to prevent the erosion of their investigativepowers.“We’re talking about lawfully authorized intercepts,” said Valerie E.Caproni, general counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.“We’re not talking expanding authority. We’re talking about preservingour ability to execute our existing authority in order to protect thepublic safety and national security.”Investigators have been concerned for years that changingcommunications technology could damage their ability to conductsurveillance. In recent months, officials from the F.B.I., the JusticeDepartment, the National Security Agency, the White House and otheragencies have been meeting to develop a proposed solution.There is not yet agreement on important elements, like how to wordstatutory language defining who counts as a communications serviceprovider, according to several officials familiar with thedeliberations.But they want it to apply broadly, including to companies that operatefrom servers abroad, like Research in Motion, the Canadian maker ofBlackBerry devices. In recent months, that company has come intoconflict with the governments of Dubai and India over their inabilityto conduct surveillance of messages sent via its encrypted service.In the United States, phone and broadband networks are alreadyrequired to have interception capabilities, under a 1994 law calledthe Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act. It aimed toensure that government surveillance abilities would remain intactduring the evolution from a copper-wire phone system to digitalnetworks and cellphones.Often, investigators can intercept communications at a switch operatedby the network company. But sometimes — like when the target uses aservice that encrypts messages between his computer and its servers —they must instead serve the order on a service provider to getunscrambled versions.Like phone companies, communication service providers are subject towiretap orders. But the 1994 law does not apply to them. While somemaintain interception capacities, others wait until they are servedwith orders to try to develop them.The F.B.I.’s operational technologies division spent $9.75 millionlast year helping communication companies — including some subject tothe 1994 law that had difficulties — do so. And its 2010 budgetincluded $9 million for a “Going Dark Program” to bolster itselectronic surveillance capabilities.Beyond such costs, Ms. Caproni said, F.B.I. efforts to help retrofitservices have a major shortcoming: the process can delay their abilityto wiretap a suspect for months.Moreover, some services encrypt messages between users, so that eventhe provider cannot unscramble them.There is no public data about how often court-approved surveillance isfrustrated because of a service’s technical design.But as an example, one official said, an investigation into a drugcartel earlier this year was stymied because smugglers used peer-to-peer software, which is difficult to intercept because it is notrouted through a central hub. Agents eventually installed surveillanceequipment in a suspect’s office, but that tactic was “risky,” theofficial said, and the delay “prevented the interception of pertinentcommunications.”Moreover, according to several other officials, after the failed TimesSquare bombing in May, investigators discovered that the suspect,Faisal Shahzad, had been communicating with a service that lackedprebuilt interception capacity. If he had aroused suspicionbeforehand, there would have been a delay before he could have beenwiretapped.To counter such problems, officials are coalescing around several ofthe proposal’s likely requirements:¶ Communications services that encrypt messages must have a way tounscramble them.¶ Foreign-based providers that do business inside the United Statesmust install a domestic office capable of performing intercepts.¶ Developers of software that enables peer-to-peer communication mustredesign their service to allow interception.Providers that failed to comply would face fines or some otherpenalty. But the proposal is likely to direct companies to come upwith their own way to meet the mandates. Writing any statute in“technologically neutral” terms would also help prevent it frombecoming obsolete, officials said.Even with such a law, some gaps could remain. It is not clear how itcould compel compliance by overseas services that do no domesticbusiness, or from a “freeware” application developed by volunteers.In their battle with Research in Motion, countries like Dubai havesought leverage by threatening to block BlackBerry data from theirnetworks. But Ms. Caproni said the F.B.I. did not support filteringthe Internet in the United States.Still, even a proposal that consists only of a legal mandate is likelyto be controversial, said Michael A. Sussmann, a former JusticeDepartment lawyer who advises communications providers.“It would be an enormous change for newly covered companies,” he said.“Implementation would be a huge technology and security headache, andthe investigative burden and costs will shift to providers.”Several privacy and technology advocates argued that requiringinterception capabilities would create holes that would inevitably beexploited by hackers.Steven M. Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor,pointed to an episode in Greece: In 2005, it was discovered thathackers had taken advantage of a legally mandated wiretap function tospy on top officials’ phones, including the prime minister’s.“I think it’s a disaster waiting to happen,” he said. “If they startbuilding in all these back doors, they will be exploited.”Susan Landau, a Radcliffe Institute of Advanced Study fellow andformer Sun Microsystems engineer, argued that the proposal would raisecostly impediments to innovation by small startups.“Every engineer who is developing the wiretap system is an engineerwho is not building in greater security, more features, or getting theproduct out faster,” she said.Moreover, providers of services featuring user-to-user encryption arelikely to object to watering it down. Similarly, in the late 1990s,encryption makers fought off a proposal to require them to include aback door enabling wiretapping, arguing it would cripple theirproducts in the global market.But law enforcement officials rejected such arguments. They saidincluding an interception capability from the start was less likely toinadvertently create security holes than retrofitting it afterreceiving a wiretap order.They also noted that critics predicted that the 1994 law would impedecellphone innovation, but that technology continued to improve. Andtheir envisioned decryption mandate is modest, they contended, becauseservice providers — not the government — would hold the key.“No one should be promising their customers that they will thumb theirnose at a U.S. court order,” Ms. Caproni said. “They can promisestrong encryption. They just need to figure out how they can provideus plain text.”A version of this article appeared in print on September 27, 2010, onpage A1 of the New York edition.

I spent last weekend at a small conference in Leipzig, organizedby Johanna Niesyto, Geert Lovink and others, called Wikipedia: DerKritische Standpunkt (A critical point of view) [1], which broughttogether researchers studying Wikipedia and 'Wikipedians', mainlyadmins and high-ranking editors. What follows relates mainly to the German language Wikipedia, but Iassume some issues are similar in other large Wikipedia, not the leastthe English language one.What came to the fore, at least for me, was that the 'inner circle'

disapparatusjulu twine dancing, approaching the disappeared alan dojoji,whose outfit is permanently destroyed; transformed into clay model,s/he is nothing, nothing,s/he is doing nothing wrong either is hir,think of virtual(virtual): as in stochastic negation, there's no return to the real,there are splits - i'd say natural kinds (of splits) between virtual and virtual(virtual) that lie, inhere within, the phenomenology of perception,it's not just that alan dojoji has undergone a transformation - but that alan dojoji has undergone a _fundamental_ transformation,this is all the difference/differance in the world (worlds),human/avatar interaction is transformed, avatar/avatar interaction is transformed - think of the inert or lozenge defined by movement- translation alone, as if the body were encased, silenced, transformed,one might chalk(line) this up to error on the part of second life software, but it is _all_ error, all displacement, correction- regulation, occupying and suturing _lag_ - and in this case, leg is permanent, continuous, remolding and reshouldering the avatar body,the absent body of alan dojoji (and others, ourselves, as well),the movies,http://www.alansondheim.org/manque.movhttp://www.alansondheim.org/nudde.movthe movie music,http://espdisk.com/alansondheim/todsang.mp3images,something of alan dojoji as clay matrix,http://www.alansondheim.org/ nudde pngssomething knot,http://www.alansondheim.org/ duett pngs

Plan CClue 2: The ParkIn the Summer 2010 a group of six artists embarked on a journey to Chernobyl to develop a secretive Plan C.Once in the Zone, they threw metal nuts. Maybe in search of an answer, they ventured into the abandoned amusement park of the ghost town of Pripyat.Finally the group located what they were hoping to find, the Red Ride. They picked through the irradiated remains. One of them got contaminated.While they were there a load of scavenged materials left the Zone.Where the materials went afterwards is still unknown.Video: http://www.PlanC.cc

ON2: Test Signals, a festival exploring new forms for radio and software, has announced its programme. The festival will bring together software developers and radio practitioners to demonstrate, discuss and develop new ways of applying software to radio on Friday 22 October and Saturday 23 October at Direktorenhaus, Berlin.http://www.testsignals.orgAppearing at the festival will be former BBC radio futurologist James Cridland, NATO Information Operations Consultant David Bailey MBE, Lukas Weiss of UNIKOM (Switzerland’s free radios association) and Chris Weaver from Resonance FM. Mozilla Drumbeat, Creative Commons, Liquidsoap, MPD and 64 Studio will also be represented amongst over 30 speakers and organisations.Audiences will be able to set radio free with Campcaster, map the city with Radio Aporee, stream net-radio with Liquidsoap and hack broadcast technologies with RadioDNS in a series of free workshops. Sign-up is free via www.testsignals.org where the full programme information can be found.In association with GTZ, Germany’s federal organisation for sustainable development, the festival will also hold a special preview event with politicians and policy makers on Thursday 21 October. On Saturday 23 October, festival partners reboot.fm will hold an Allstars Afterparty in .HBC Berlin featuring some of Berlin’s hottest radio and musical talent.The festival is organised by Sourcefabric, a not-for-profit organisation supporting independent and open source media worldwide. reboot.fm, Berlin’s free cultural radio station, and user-generated radio pioneers Open Broadcast from Switzerland are official partners of the festival. The festival is also an official satellite event of transmediale, festival for art and digital culture, and is the first in a series of open-source workshop events supported by the Free Culture Incubator. The festival is also partnered by Mute magazine, a magazine dedicated to exploring culture and politics after the net.For more information contact the festival organiser Adam Thomas (adam.thomas< at >sourcefabric.org) or http://www.testsignals.org.# 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://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime< at >kein.org

(please post soon, the files can't remain up, thanks, Alan)Eros and Logos in Second LifeErasure / Manque in Second LifeQuickly the installation disappears, objects deleted or returned todatabase. Deletion is absolute; in spite of appearances, virtual worldshave no memory. Digital bits are always negotiable, and what is gone isannihilated; even energy disappears. Scripts never return - they simplyhave never been, image/video evidence to the contrary. It is allconstructible beneath the sign of capital; eliminated, there is anothersign, that of genocide or the Phaistos disk.http://www.alansondheim.org/okamiierasure.mp4Earlier, these happened, as if eros had anything but a formal role toplay. Listen carefully and a voice asks the expense of another skin,against impossible odds of sexuality manifest anywhere other than thearticulated apparent membrane of the body. Someday this will change, andfelt constructs will replace visual animations. But think about this as areversal, and retroactive: think of skin and sexuality now, as alreadygone, or the production of something organic in a vastly ancient world.We're tumbling towards that, doing everything we can to speed things up:annihilation to the limit, or, as the world dies, to the limitless.There's no technological future, none organic. These dancing figure aresimulacra, already ghosts, unrealizing before their virtual, and real,worlds disappear forever.http://www.alansondheim.org/okamii.mp4http://www.alansondheim.org/okamii2.mp4http://www.alansondheim.org/okamii3.mp4It always seems, even in the midst of artificial passion, suicidal, thegibbering of membranes without thought: we have never thought, in fact orotherwise. Look at the despair with which one grasps the last ofWittgenstein's Tractatus, as if mysticism somehow opens a gate. But thegate is gateless, a zen without recourse or koan, without the poetics ofmysticism. Grown up, we can read Philo again as godless, someone findingmeaning everywhere, someone always trying. There are others tryingslaughter on for size.It is remarkable how the _bending back_ of an ikon or avatar constructsan offering, sexualized but beyond the Pale. No one is the victor in theseencounters; everyone arises aroused, just before the erasure of the world.

Deleuze, and (Which) Politics?Stevphen Shukaitis From Culture Machine (http://www.culturemachine.net)If, somewhere out in the world, there was a social-political theory- marketing firm, its CEO would have to conclude that the Deleuze brand has done exceptionally well. Over the past four decades it has moved from marginal Francophone export to a near hegemonic discourse that has infiltrated multiple academic disciplines, areas of political discussion, and sections of the art world. Moreover, it has attained this status, spawning various cottage industries, while continuing to hold the interest of many people involved in social movement politics. It is this sense of Deleuze’s work as connected to radical politics, even if there is still a lingering uncertainty about the nature of its radicality (Buchanan, 2000), that continually renews interest in his ideas and facilitates their circulation.Thus we come to Deleuze & Politics, a collection edited by Nick Thoburn and Ian Buchanan, as part of the ever-growing flagship line of the Deleuze brand, the “Deleuze Connections” series. It is a series that takes seriously the much quoted injunction of Deleuze to move from an ontology based on the notion ‘or’ (this or that) to one of the multiplicity of ‘and’ (this and that, and that, and that). And this has been followed through quite literally, spawning a whole series of collections connecting Deleuze and an immense array of topics: Deleuze and… Contemporary Art (Zepke and O’Sullivan, 2010), Feminist Theory (Buchanan and Colebrook, 2000), Geophilosophy (Bonta and Protevi, 2004), History (Bell and Colebrook, 2009), Literature (Buchanan and Marks, 2000), Music (Buchanan and, Swiboda 2004), New Technology (Savat and Poster, 2009), Performance (Cull, 2009), Philosophy (Boundas, 2006), Queer Theory (Nigianni and Storr, 2009), Space (Buchanan and Lambert, 2005), The Contemporary World (Buchanan and Parr, 2006), The Postcolonial (Bignall and Patton, 2010), The Social (Fuglsang and Sorensen, 2006), as well as the Deleuze Studies journal. And one would not want to forget forthcoming titles in the series including ones on Ethics (Smith and Jun, 2011) and The Body (Guillaume and Hughes, 2010). At times it seems that the assemblage of Deleuzian theory is capable of proliferating in almost absurdly expansive ways, recombining itself with almost anything and everything.Such concerns aside, what does this collection tell us about the relation between Deleuze’s ideas/approach and politics? And in what ways could these insights be used for rethinking ongoing political questions today? First and foremost there is a strong effort to show that Deleuze is a political thinker in his own right, and not just in his collaborations with Guattari. While this might seem not all that surprising argument, it is a good counter to the tendency to strip Delueze’s work of politics (often but not just through the stripping away of Guattari), rendering it into a clever machine that can be endlessly recombined with almost any topic to say interesting but relatively harmless things. But more important than the affirmation of Deleuze as a political thinker, what we find in this collection is a wide range of topics which can both enlighten and be enlightened by the concepts and questions found in Deleuze’s work.The essays in this collection address a wide variety of areas including questions of micropolitics, war, friendship, theromodynamics, political militancy, ethnicity, the European Union, mythmaking, cynicism, as well as others. As Thoburn and Buchanan describe in their introduction, if the events of May 1968 resulted in a kind of failure that rendered strategic thinking impossible (a debatable argument), Deleuze and Guattari’s work responds to this challenge, tracing out genealogies of how desires are formed and invested within particular configurations. From there, they explore how the reconfigurations of these social relations and associations are possible. From this perspective, the dizzying array of ways that Deleuze’s work can be thought in relation to politics is not a fault, but rather a key concept: political strategies are not formed within a particular isolated realm of the political, but through the spaces created by conjoining and carving out spaces within these realms.It is the varying nature of these conjunctions, or creating of space in an area, that is of the most crucial important. It is how the ‘and’ of the Deleuzian connection becomes more than a grammatical operator and indeed becomes a properly conceptual one. This becomes more complex as it put to different uses. This can be seen in Buchanan’s assertion that Deleuze and Guattari’s approach to understanding social formations through the flows of desire that structure them as “though complex in its details, is in fact relatively simple and not unfamiliar in its thrust” (18). One encounters a similar argument in the essay by Isabelle Garo, in which she comments that the political dimension of Delueze’s work is “as evident as it is allusive”(68). For Garo the political dimension of Deleuze’s work is indeed real, but more problematically, and interestingly:that does not mean that political analysis or even a political perspective can be found in a strictly defined way in his work. And the paradoxical feeling that his thought does have a specifically political contemporary relevance perhaps stems from the fact that what was in the process of disappearing when he wrote his work is, precisely, in the process or re-emerging today: in both cases a figure becomes blurred and persists at the same time, the very idea of politics dissolves and is redefined, as that which never ceases to haunt philosophy and also to escape it. (71)Perhaps it is this blurred persistence that makes Deleuze’s work and its applications both useful, but at the same time occasionally frustrating, in their proliferation. For instance, you could argue, as Paul Patton does on the relation between Deleuze and democratic politics, that because Deleuze and Guattari do not directly address the normative principles that inform their work, or how they might be articulated within present social conditions, “their machinic social ontology remains formal in relation to actual societies and forms of political organization” (183). Conversely one could see this, far from being a weakness, as the foundation of why Deleuze’s ideas remain relevant: in their open relation to rethinking questions and political strategy and forming new concepts. Phillipe Mengue seems to hint towards this in his essay on political fabulation when he discusses Deleuze’s often-quoted statement that the people are missing. For Mengue, the absence of the people as pre-given formation, far from eliminating the possibility of politics, “makes possible not only a new concept of politics but also a new function for the people, essentially and exclusively the function of resistance” (225). This could just as easily be said about Deleuze himself: that his absence as a fixed pre-given form within this area known as “Deleuze studies” (or work inspired by or using Deleuzian ideas) is so productive precisely because of its absent center, around which other forms can be generated. It is thus both a limitation and possibility, or a proliferation of endless possibilities (and, and, and) that might also conversely be an unrealized limitation. After all, there is a limit to what a body of work can do.Let’s broadly say, then, that there are three main approaches to how the conjunction between Deleuze and politics is understood and developed, both within this collection and more broadly. Rough they are:- Deleuzian politics: working from Deleuze’s particular engagements with ideas or politics, or elaborating the politics argued to be inherent to a concept or set of ideas.- Deleuze & politics: using Deleuzian concepts to analyze given political phenomena.- Deleuze in & against politics: working from within the entangled and mutated bastardizations of concepts that start from, drift around and/ or through a Deleuzian landscape.This is obviously a rough typology, to say the least, but one that is still useful. For the most part it is the first two modalities that are prevalent within academic work and writing. These approaches attempt to fix, whether precisely or not, an object that is identified as Deleuze, and then seek to develop a politics directly out of those concepts or by applying them to analyze other phenomena. These are approaches that maintain the theoretical real estate of the proper name. And indeed work done from such perspectives can be quite useful. But it runs into two problems. First, a limit might be reached to the theoretical creativity of a body of work. Second, there might be a problem with pinning down a relation for long enough to work with it. Closure and the lack of closure can have the same effect: they can both limit the productivity of engagement.And this brings us to the third category, namely the area of bastardization, mutation, and recombination. At first sight, this area would seem to be properly Deleuzian, even if the continual transformation and encoding was precisely serving to avoid being fixed as this or that, or this and that. This flux seems to cause problems for how something like a Deleuzian politics is understood. Take for instance Peter Hallward’s Out of this World (2006), which employs an approach very much like Deleuze’s to the history of philosophy to tackle Deleuze’s work itself. Hallward centers his book around the idea of creation, arguing that Deleuze’s work is based on the endless power and possibility of the virtual over the compromised capacity of the actual. This results in a politics that can only lead out of this world, because the potential of the actualized world is always compromised in comparison to the virtual. Therefore, Deleuze’s concepts and politics are insufficient for the demands of radical politics precisely because of how they lead one out of the world rather than through the pressing tasks and demands of the present. There is substance to this book and it is worth reading and considering. One could take issue with Hallward’s understanding of how the virtual and actual are coupled, but the issue here is more pressing: Hallward never considers the ways that people engaged in political movements use Deleuze’s concepts. It is curious that a book claiming that Deleuze’s concepts are insufficient for engaging with politics in the world spends little time actually looking at what happens when such ideas are mobilized in politics. In other words, an argument made about the politics inherently contained in a set of ideas is then used to make an argument about what potential they have. Hallward makes an argument about the political usefulness of a set of ideas or approach without giving almost any attention to how they are actually used.One could offer as a counter to this kind of argument many of the pieces found within this collection. These chapters illustrate clearly that Deleuzian concepts do not necessarily mean a flowing out of the world. Perhaps they refocus the task of exiting from this world, or plotting an exodus to a more liberatory form of social relations contained within the virtual potential of the present. But going out of this world need not be interpreted literally, but in terms of finding escape routes from the domination of the present to reshape, or to find weapons and concepts in that fleeing that would be useful for reshaping the present. For instance one could take as a prime example Radio Alice and the Italian autonomist movements of the late 1970s. The first broadcast of Radio Alice in February 1976 invited people to stay in bed and make musical instruments and war machines. The activities of Radio Alice (as well as its name) were based around a playful reading of Deleuze’s The Logic of Sense, and thinking about the effects of language, of breaking communication and meaning, and how these ideas could be fused with the tactics of the historical avant-garde into a strategy for media politics and confrontation. These ideas spread to other autonomous movements of the time, such that there were demonstrations that included slogans based on the ideas of Anti-Oedipus.(1)Or to approach this another way, when considering the relation between Deleuze and politics (or any other thinker), the politics of that conjunction do not necessarily follow from characteristics inherent to the concepts employed but in how they are employed. This is another way of saying that a great part, perhaps even the majority, of the politics of any concept is in how it is enacted within social relations of that enactment rather than in and of concept itself. As Hakim Bey once observed, it is not necessary to fully or properly understand a concept in order to use it. And this is why the bastardized, mutated forms of how ideas are employed become important (often without proper reference at all), particularly with theorists such as Deleuze and Guattari whose influence is key within social movements and radical politics. This conjunction of Deleuze and politics, of Deleuze in the movement of the political, is much more difficult to track with any certainty.(2) To give an example of this, the work of someone like Bey has been quite influenced by the ideas of Delueze and Guattari, which have in turn been translated into concepts (such as the idea of Temporary Autonomous Zones) that have been quite influential within anarchist politics during the past two decades. But even as Deleuze’s ideas influence someone like Bey (he once described his politics as based around “non-hegemonic particularities in a nomadological or rhizomatic mutuality of synergistic solidarities” (Bey, 1996), a phrase inflected with more than a degree of Deleuzian influence), he very rarely cites Deleuze directly. In this way, much of the influence of Deleuze’s in political social movements, flowing and developing in minor and subterranean modalities, gets passed over or not noticed.Deleuze and politics, therefore, becomes a composition that animates and underlies the social configuration that embodies an elaboration of politics using Deleuzian concepts. This is what Nick Thoburn suggests in his essay on political militancy and subjectivity when he suggests that if Anti-Oedipus was a book of antifascist ethics (as Foucault claimed), then A Thousand Plateaus is “precisely concerned with the exploration of modes and techniques of intensive composition, often of a most experimental and liminal kind” (114). This is how Thoburn frames Deleuze and Guattari’s work in terms of thinking through questions of militant subjectivity, of finding ways around the hardening or ossifying closure of political possibility, or a diffuse form that becomes untenable. The question of militant subjectivity as composition is precisely one of unfolding subjectivity within a broader process of social movement, or the reconfiguration of the social world. Very much the same question is taken up by Jason Read in his contribution to the volume as he explores questions around the production of subjectivity within capitalism, arguing that every mode of production is at the same time inseparable from a form of subjection that is necessary to its operation. For Read, this illustrates the ways in which capitalism is both a revolution in production and subjectivation, as revolution that appears as liberation, one that Deleuze and Guattari explore to show how it constantly tries to constrain and make productive that which escapes it.This focus on questions of composition and subjectivation within capitalism picks up on some of the most fruitful directions for the development of Deleuzian concepts, by hybridizing them with concepts and arguments coming out of autonomist and post-workerist traditions of politics and analysis. The composition of subjectivity is understood both as a form of political composition, but also in relation to the changing technical composition of capitalist valorization. Perhaps it is the lingering effect of Empire, where previously there seemed to be an implicit divide between using ideas developed by figures such as Deleuze and Foucault at the same time as drawing from the Marxist tradition. This, thankfully, has fallen away. This sort of autonomist-Deleuze influence approach to politics and social theory can be seen in the work of Thoburn (2003), Read (2003), Terranova (2004), DJ Spooky (2004), Bratich (2008), Papadopoulos, Stephenson, and Tsianos (2008), as well others. To the same tradition, we can add a recent issue of Deleuze Studies which takes up the relation between Deluze and Marx (Jain, 2009), an issue of New Formations (Gilbert and Nigianni, 2010) on Deleuzian politics, and the work of the Team Colors collective (2010). All of these elaborate a compositional approach to similar questions.Paolo Virno once described the miracles of the multitude as being the awaited but unexpected events that radically change and transform the political configuration of the present (1996). Over the past several decades the work of Deleuze has become seemingly indispensable in the ongoing task of analyzing the transformations and mutations of capital, subjectivity, ethics, aesthetics, and an almost endless list of topics and areas. Indeed, at times the proliferating assemblage of politics taking up Deleuze’s ideas nearly stretches beyond a point that would hold them together with any sense of coherence. At the same time, enacting a precise closure or delimitation of these proliferations in any particular configuration would shut down the very productivity that makes them interesting. This is the problem and possibility that lingers in the question of Deleuze and politics: how far can this relationship be stretched without breaking, or held together without losing its vitality? While this collection is not likely to answer that question conclusively (and it is doubtful whether it could or if this would be desirable), it does provide a number of tools, weapons, and routes for teasing out this conjunction. If we take up the idea that “desire belongs to the infrastructure” (139), which is central to Jason Read’s piece, we might conversely say that the imagination of a Deleuzian politics, in so far that there is one, belongs to the infrastructure of politics that compose that infrastructure, constantly folding over and recreating itself in new mutations.Endnotes1. For more on the use of Deleuze’s work in Italian autonomous movements see Beradi (2009) and Berardi, Jacquemet, Vitali (2009).2. Hopefully the forthcoming post-anarchist reader (Rousselle and Evren, forthcoming 2011) will at least partially address this.ReferencesBell, J. and C. Colebrook (eds) (2009) Deleuze and History. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Berardi, F. (2009) Precarious Rhapsody: Semiocapitalism and the pathologies of post-alpha generation. London: Minor Compositions.Berardi, F., M. Jacquemet, G. Vitali (2009) Ethereal Shadows: Communications and Power in Contemporary Italy. Brooklyn: Autonomedia.Bey, H. (1996) Millenium. Brooklyn: Autonomedia. Also available at http://hermetic.com/bey/millennium/index.htmlBignall, S. and P. Patton (eds) (2010) Deleuze and the Postcolonial. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Bonta, M. and J. Protevi (2004) Deleuze and Geophilosophy: A Guide and Glossary. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Boundas, C. (ed.) (2006) Deleuze and Philosophy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Bratich, J.Z. (2008) Conspiracy Panics: Political Rationality and Popular Culture. Binghamton: SUNY Press.Buchanan, I. (2000) Deleuzism: A Metacommentary. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Buchanan, I. and C. Colebrook (eds) (2000) Deleuze and Feminist Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Buchanan, I. and J. Marks (eds) (2000) Deleuze and Literature. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Buchanan, I. and M. Swiboda (eds) (2004) Deleuze and Music. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Buchanan, I. and G. Lambert (eds) (2005) Deleuze and Space. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Buchanan, I. and A. Parr (eds) (2006) Deleuze and the Contemporary World. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Cull, L. (ed.) (2009) Deleuze and Performance. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.DJ Spooky (2004) Rhythm science. Cambridge: MIT Press.Fuglsang, M. and B.M. Sorensen (eds) (2006) Deleuze and the Social. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Gilbert, J. and C. Nigianni, Eds. (2010) New Formations: a journal of culture/theory/politics, Number 68, Deleuzian Politics?Guillaume, L. and J. Hughes (eds) (forthcoming 2010) Deleuze and the Body. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Hallward, P. (2006) Out of This World: Deleuze and the Philosophy of Creation. London: Verso.Jain, D. (Ed.) (2009) Deleuze Studies Volume 3 Supplement Issue, Deleuze and Marx.Nigianni, C. and M. Storr (eds) (2009) Deleuze and Queer Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Papadopoulos, D., N. Stephenson, and V. Tsianos (2008) Escape Routes: Control and Subversion in the 21st Century. London: Pluto Press.Read, J. (2003) The Micro-Politics of Capital: Marx and the Prehistory of the Present. Albany: State University of New York Press.Rousselle, D. and S. Evren (forthcoming 2011) Post-Anarchism: A Reader. London: Pluto.Savat, D. and M. Poster (eds) (2009) Deleuze and New Technology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Smith, D. and N. Jun (eds) (forthcoming 2011) Deleuze and Ethics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Team Colors (eds) (2010) Uses of a Whirlwind: Movement, Movements, and Contemporary Radical Currents in the United States. Oakland: AK Press. Also, www.warmachines.info.Terranova, T. (2004) Network Culture: Politics for the Information Age. London: Pluto Press.Thoburn, N. (2003) Deleuze, Marx, and Politics. London: Routledge.Virno, P. (1996) “Virtuosity and Revolution: A Political Theory of Exodus,” Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics. M. Hardt and P. Virno (Eds) Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Zepke, S. and S. O’Sullivan (eds) (2010) Deleuze and Contemporary Art. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Dear nettimers,I hope this event I'm co-organizing may be of interest to some of you.Cheers,Matt Soarhttp://coms.concordia.caDATABASE|NARRATIVE|ARCHIVEAn International Symposium on Nonlinear Digital StorytellingRevised CFPConcordia University, Montréal (13-15 May 2011)Keynotes:Marsha Kinder (Professor of Critical Studies, School of CinematicArts, USC; Executive Director of The Labyrinth Project)Katerina Cizek (Award-winning experimental documentarian; Filmmaker inResidence, National Film Board of Canada)With a nonlinear, interactive lecture by Florian Thalhofer (Berlin;documentary filmmaker; inventor of the Korsakow System)Confirmed participants: Hart Cohen (UWS), Adrian Miles (RMIT), SteveAnderson (USC), David Clark (NSCAD), Tim Schwab (CINER-G), ElenaRazlogova (CINER-G), Jason Lewis (CINER-G, Obx Labs), Monika KinGagnon (CINER-G, co-organizer), Matt Soar (CINER-G, co-organizer).Reflecting recent developments in the theories and practices of newmedia production, described variously as database documentary,interactive narrative, and experimental archiving, D|N|A seeks tohighlight some of the most important issues and ideas currentlycharacterizing this emerging discourse - and perhaps constitutive of afuture, core set of properties or dynamics. (Contemporary works ofnote that characterize some of these developments include: PlanetGalata; The Thousandth Tower; Gaza/Sderot; 7 Sons; St. Michael'sHospital; The Whale Hunt; Folk Songs for the Five Points; Klatsassin;Soft Cinema; Life after Wartime; Danube Exodus; Tulse LuperSuitcases.)This interdisciplinary symposium will bring together theorists,scholars, artists, curators and programmers, currently working inthese and related areas for panel presentations, roundtables,screenings, a Korsakow workshop, and an exhibition, in a three-dayevent intended to foster discussions, creative exchange and debate. Wealso aim to stimulate and provoke creative/productive communityengagements before, during, and after the symposium and will thereforebe involving individuals and organizations in several activities thatlead into the event and grow out of it.As a guide, we welcome innovative and engaging proposals addressingthe following areas, but also invite other proposals of potentialrelevance:- critical engagements with existing works and/or artists- audiences as communities and vice versa- theoretical engagements with authorship, interactivity, databasesand multimedia archives- historical precursors (multi-screen cinema; choose your own adventure)- genres of non-fiction media: archival, interview/oral history,witness/testimonial/first person, ethnographic.- critiques of commercial practices (eg Second Story; Terra Incognita)- the potentials and limitations of specific authoring and deliveryplatforms (eg Flash, Korsakow, HTML 5)- visual aesthetics and electronic literature- exhibition, distribution and alternative forms of circulation- future potentials (mobile applications, haptic screens, voice- andmovement-activated interfaces, iPad, HTML5, expressive type)Proposals (email only, with plaintext, Word, or PDF attachments only)and expressions of interest should be sent to Matt Soar and Monika KinGagnon at dnasymposium-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w< at >public.gmane.org Please tell us in about 500 wordswhat ideas, research, and/or creative work you'd like to present atthe symposium, and bear in mind that we are especially interested infinding ways to break out from traditional conference-stylepresentations. Your proposal can be work in progress, but should besufficiently advanced by May 2011 to be presentable. Add a finalparagraph explaining who you are, what you do, and where we cancontact you. The revised deadline is December 15th, 2010.D|N|A is being organized by CINER-G, the Concordia InteractiveNarrative Experimentation & Research Group, with support from theFQRSC, Concordia University (VP Research & Graduate Studies), and theGoethe Institute. For more information, updates and amendments to thisCFP, please visit: www.cinerg.ca

a message from garciaytalk garcia[1;20r[?7h[H= YTalk version 3.3.0 =-----------------------------[2;1H[Ringing garcia...][Waiting for connection...][24C###############################[31D# Rering garcia? #[31D###############################[24C###############################[31D# Rering garcia? #[31D###############################[24C###############################[31D# Rering garcia? #[31D###############################[H= YTalk version 3.3.0 =-----------------------------[2;1H[53C[14B[9B= =-----------------------------[11;1H[53C[10B1985. my name is nikuko. i'm a secret russian foreign agent. i don'thave time to live.[6Bi'm waiting for a message from garcia. i've been waiting for themessage since[13B hello hello. there is static on the line. it is difficult to ransackmemory in this fashion. i am garcia. i understand there is a message.there is confusion on the lind e. i am waiting for the end of confusion.it is better to have the me message late than not at all.[8Byes yes that is true. sevastopol. think sevastopol. you do rememberdon't you g garcia.[5Bnights and days i n sevastopol. it's coming back to me. i remember thedropoff p point. the old telegraph station, the key. it was winter, theworst, the very w worst of snows.[7Cyes, we waited and waited for each other, didn't we. and it seemedalmos almost as if it was to no avail. do yoyu u remember how man enacingthe world seemed, how hopeless. and now. -[8Band now things have gone from bad to worse, and the message, filledwith death[9;1Hand bullets, filled with secrecy and subaltern reasoning, seems nolonger urgen urgent.[24Cor[Aor rather to say that urgency has passed us by, that nothing is urgentwhen ev everything is, that the dimensionality of the unniverse itself hasarrived of iits own accord -[8Bas with all creatures, we're going to die, perhaps a bit early, perhapsin a bi bit more debris, surrounded by debris cho , or choking on debris,but die m j , just as[9;1Hever and before, and this is the urgence, this dying, but only -[19;1Hbut only this urgency e for us, for no one else, our private sevbaastopol, the lasof the messages for garcia,[9;1Hthe last of the messages for nuk ikuko, for n anyone, the last ofwhat might have bee lalasting[10Bmight have been lasting, if only for a while, the shortest while, thetiniest mmoment, fleeting smile in the very last spring of the world -[8Bah goodbye, bgoodbye, meeting is neither sweet nor sorrow, but the meat of death[9;1Hitself...[9;1Hgoodbye, garcia[10Bgoodbye, nikuko[10;51H=-----------------------[11;1H=-----------------------------[12;1Hbit [12;5Hmore [12;10Hdebris, [12;18Hsurrounded [12;29Hby[12;32Hdebris, [12;40Hor [12;43Hchoking [12;51Hon [12;54Hdebris,[12;62Hbut [12;66Hdie [12;70H, [12;72Hjus [12;72H [13;1Hjust [13;6Has[14;1Hever [14;6Hand [14;10Hbefore, [14;18Hand [14;22Hthis [14;27His[14;30Hthe [14;34Hurgence, [14;43Hthis [14;48Hdying, [14;55Hbut[14;59Honly [14;64H- [15;1Hthe [15;5Hlast [15;10Hof [15;13Hmessages[15;22Hfor [15;26Hnikuko, [15;34Hfor [15;38Hanyone, [15;46Hthe [15;50Hlast[15;55Hof [15;58Hwhat [15;63Hmight [15;69Hhave [15;74Hb [15;74H [16;1Hbee[17;1Hlasting[3;1H=-----------------------------[4;1Hbit more debris, surrounded by debris, or choking on debris, but die, [5;1Hjust as [6;1Hever and before, and this is the urgence, this dying,but only - [7;1Hthe last of messages for nikuko, for anyone, the last ofwhat might have [8;1Hbee [9;1Hlasting[10;1Hah [10;4Hgoodbye, [10;13Hgoodbye, [10;22Hmeeting [10;30His[10;33Hneither [10;41Hsweet [10;47Hnor [10;51Hsorrow, [10;59Hbut[10;63Hthe [10;67Hmeat [10;72Hof [10;75H [11;1Hdeath [12;1Hitself...[13;1Hgoodbye, [13;10Hgarcia[15;1H-----------------------------=[15;51H=-----------------------[16;1H=-----------------------------[17;1Heverything [17;12His, [17;16Hthat [17;21Hthe [17;25Hdimensionality[17;40Hof [17;43Hthe [17;47Hunniverse [17;57Hitself [17;64Hhas[17;68Harrived [17;76H [3;1Hdeath [4;1Hitself... [5;1Hgoodbye, garcia[8;1H=-----------------------------[9;1Heverything is, that the dimensionality of the unniverse itself hasarrived[10;1Ho [10;2Hf [11;1Hits [11;5Hown [11;9Haccord- [13;1Hbut [13;5Honly[13;10Hthis [13;15Hurgence [13;23Hfor [13;27Hus, [13;31Hfor [13;35Hno[13;38Hone [13;42Helse, [13;48Hour [13;52Hprivate [13;60Hsevastopol,[13;72Hthe [13;76H [14;1Hlast [15;1Hof [15;4Hthe [15;8Hmessages [15;17Hfor[15;21Hgarcia, [16;1Hmight [16;7Hhave [16;12Hbeen [16;17Hlasting,[16;26Hif [16;29Honly [16;34Hfor [16;38Ha [16;40Hwhile, [16;47Hthe[16;51Hshortest [16;60Hwhile, [16;67Hthe [16;71Htini [16;71H [17;1Htiniest[3;1Hits own accord -[5;1Hbut only this urgence for us, for no one else, our privatesevastopol, the[6;1Hlast[7;1Hof the messages for garcia,[8;1Hmight have been lasting, if only for a while, the shortest while, the[9;1Htiniest [10;1Hmoment, [10;9Hfleeting [10;18Hsmile [10;24Hin[10;27Hthe [10;31Hvery [10;36Hlast----------------------------= YTalk version 3.3.0=---------------------------------------------------------= YTalk version 3.3.0=---------------------------------------------------------= YTalk version 3.3.0=-----------------------------its own accord -but only this urgence for us, for no one else, our private sevastopol,the lastof the messages for garcia,might have been lasting, if only for a while, the shortest while, thetiniestmoment, fleeting smile in the very last spring of the world -goodbye, nikuko=--------------------------as with all creatures, we're going to die, perhaps a bit early, perhapsin abit more debris, surrounded by debris, or choking on debris, but die ,just asever and before, and this is the urgence, this dying, but only -the last of messages for nikuko, for anyone, the last of what might havebeelastingah goodbye, goodbye, meeting is neither sweet nor sorrow, but the meat ofdeathitself...goodbye, garcia----------------------------= YTalk version 3.3.0=-----------------------------bit more debris, surrounded by debris, or choking on debris, but die ,just asever and before, and this is the urgence, this dying, but only -the last of messages for nikuko, for anyone, the last of what might havebeelastingah goodbye, goodbye, meeting is neither sweet nor sorrow, but the meat ofdeathitself...goodbye, garcia=-----------------------------everything is, that the dimensionality of the unniverse itself has arrivedofits own accord -but only this urgence for us, for no one else, our private sevastopol, thelastof the messages for garcia,might have been lasting, if only for a while, the shortest while, thetiniestmoment, fleeting smile in the very last=-----------------------------=-----------------------------=-----------------------------ah goodbye, goodbye, meeting is neither sweet nor sorrow, but the meat ofdeathitself...goodbye, garcia,goodbye

Fun with SoftwareA discussion with Annet Dekker and Olga GoriunovaOlga Goriunova is curator and Annet Dekker is co-producer (as partof aaaan.net) of the multi-venue exhibition 'Fun With Software' (inBristol) and 'Funware' (in Eindhoven and Dortmund). The exhibitionhas many aspects to it, being in some ways a retrospective of certainstrands in software art, a set of propositions about the nature ofdigital culture and an argument, made through the conjunction ofworks, for a fundamental appreciation of fun as an inventive livelyforce in all forms of life.This discussion was carried out by email in late September and earlyOctober 2010.Matthew Fuller: 'Fun' is an interesting term to use, it is somehow,juvenile, gleeful, grinning, something not as 'serious' as humour,or jokes, which have their literature and interpretations, nor doesit necessarily correspond to the policy scam of 'creativity', or theindustrial dimension of games. But yet, there's a quality of fun whichlinks all these things and you have assembled some exemplary 'cases'of them here. What forms does fun appear in, in the exhibition?Olga Goriunova: 'Fun' for me is a force, an energy, an unfolding ofa certain ensemble of curiosity, inappropriateness, going beyond anddeviating from what is laid out or logically consequential to thecurrent condition. Such an energy can be easily recognised in science,in art, as something traditionally acknowledged and aspired for,though more recently endangered through neoliberal framing in terms ofusefulness if not direct profit.As such, the idea behind the show is to think how freaks run theworld. The fun they have when poking at the screens of reality todiscover other realities is what I imagine the concept of fun isabout. Now, beyond shared qualities, there is a distinctiveness of funin relation to, broadly speaking, computation and computers. Fun herebecomes related to formal logic and repetition, to the question ofwhere software starts and ends, to mental states, to what operationsit can carry out on the world, to the cultures and usages of software,to its building upon itself, to its aesthetics. Humour often adjoinsfun when software, but also its realm of production and operation,is tested against dominance, boredom, madness, power; the fun I aminterested in can also be absurd rather than jolly.Fun lets one see the territories that are in-between computer scienceand digital folklore, the art and cultures of using conventionalsoftware. Probably, the juvenile aspect you are talking about is theunseriousness of fun, which is the bravery generally ascribed toyouth to ignore the often self-inflicted order of 'seriousness'. Suchseriousness is the effect of power systems, of orders of rationalityproducing forces that act in a manner that is 'more royal than theking'. And certainly, fun can be and is used then to update suchorders to complexify the systems of reinforcement.The exhibition tries to attend to different aspects of fun. DavidLink reconstructs the 'Love Letter Generator' written in 1952 byChristopher Strachey, with Alan Turing, that predates all earlygenerally known text generating algorithms. It produced beautifullyabsurd love letters on a Ferranti Mark 1 - one of the first electroniccomputers. . On production, the poems were hung around the walls ofManchester University, mystifying the students who came there todo something very serious. The work presents the complete workingmemory and processor of 'Love Letter Generator' which can be seenon 12 cathode ray tubes which the Ferranti used for memory, storingbits in phosphor. This work will be shown in the Arnolfini, Bristol,and for Eindhoven, David is working on 'Draughts'. Here is how Daviddescribes it: ' In 1947, the electrical engineers Frederic Williamsand Tom Kilburn succeeded at the University of Manchester to constructthe first reliable means for the volatile storage of information --the Williams tube. Two years later, the device had evolved into theManchester Mark I, arguably the first computer worldwide. The earliestmajor program for this machine was written in 1951 by an outsider, theschool teacher Christopher Strachey, who had obtained the technicalmanual from a former fellow student, Alan Turing. The task of thissoftware was not to calculate the trajectory of missiles, but to playthe game of draughts (checkers).'In these various versions of the exhibition and with the overallconcept, I try to present different time periods, problems throughwhich fun manifests, be they visual aesthetic or functional, subjectsor objects that have agency, cultures of producing fun and moments atwhich it can emerge.MF: Given these different time periods, how might you perhapscharacterize them, how does the possibility of fun proliferate ordiminish at different times in relation to specific kinds of computingculture?OG: This is a question to a broadminded historian. However, onecould certainly say that there is a different sensibility to everytime period, however hard it can be to give the exact dating. Here,David Link's work comments of the 1950s and challenges the view thatcomputing was always heavily dominated by the military interests.Strachey and Turing, as demonstrated in the show, were also impliedin the kinds of making sense of the world through the funny, peculiarand the absurd. Computing of the 1950s and 1960s still remained quiteclosed for wider tinkering. The 1970s and 1980s brought around homecomputers and 'script kiddies' avant la lettre, and a new era of funbegun, less like the absurdist fun of, say, the writer Daniil Kharms,but more homebrew and hands-on, with a distinctive materiality andaesthetic that is alive up to this moment. The 1990s were the yearsof the explosion of digital avant-gardes, very similar to the Soviet1920s, where similar drives of inventing and establishing new orderscould be sensed in unrelated domains and artists, computer labs ofUniversities, companies made up the languages of today.But again, if one changes the viewpoint and looks at the historyof computer science, a different timeline could be developed, withbrilliant humanist and humourous programmers, such as Dijkstra comingto the fore, whose acts and breakthroughs stand as milestones.MF: The first stage of the show, which has just opened at theArnolfini in Bristol, proposes perhaps a more 'Geeky' aspect of fun,that suggests an interest in code, devices, unexpected solutions tonewly imagined problems. Is there a particular relation to fun in geekcultures you are interested in here?OG: Certainly, there is a particular relation to fun in geek cultures.There is professional humour, the insider jokes, the obsessionand dedication, cultures of enquiry and leisure, of building andmaintaining the structures. I guess what interests me in this respectis the artistic nature of geekiness, for instance, the way in whichobjects and processes, projects that are thrilling artistic works areproduced within systems of coordinates which are not interested in artat all.The proximity of ways of working and imagining, of letting thingsto be seen and experienced that are offered in certain 'geeky' workand art work makes sensible certain kinds of forces that traverseunrelated areas in making the world up.Take 'Tempest for Eliza' by Eric Thiele. This project is done by aprogrammer 'for fun'. It is there to explore the reality of TEMPEST- a secret service code word coined in the late 60-s - early 70-sfor the using of and defending against 'compromising emissions'.Electronic devices emit electromagnetic waves, which can be caught inorder for the original data to be reconstructed. Tempest for Elizademonstrates this in a very precise manner: the software producesimages ('one for each note in the song'), which are displayed by thecomputer monitor, which sends electromagnetic waves of very highfrequencies, which are then caught by short wave AM radio. Here, thethoughtfulness and irony of the project are supported by the formalistcoherency of the images produced; and the seemingly non-purposefulusage of a computer reveals the multi-layeredness and complexity ofits materiality.The best examples of fun in geek cultures offer exactly that elegantcomplexity at the level of formalist qualities, meanings, frameworks,mixed with non-pretentiousness. As statements and ways of seeing, theyare laborious, laconic and exact, like haiku.MF: As we've said, the show includes work from several time periods,things that operate as art, but also under other rubrics outside ofart. Elsewhere, the idea of 'Digital Folk' is one way in which youhave spoken about certain computing cultures, the sensibilities activehere cross in and out of art, particular kinds of technicity. The showfeels refreshingly unconstrained in this way...OG: As related to the question above, digital folk is a phenomenonthat draws heavily on geek cultures. At the same time, there is asense in which digital folk - a variety of cultures that use, adapt,produce software that makes and 'changes' sense in relation to labourconditions, states of work, certain aesthetic normalities, softwareoperations and allowances, always stay minor.Digital folklore still awaits its dedicated scholar while certaintimes and kinds of it are becoming lost. At the same time, a part ofit, along with software art, made its way into the world of iPhoneapplications where it is often detached from its operationality, ofthe ways in which it had a relation to the modes in which an OS worksor hangs, to the joint subject formed in-between a desktop computerand its tense user.MF: The Runme.org site also appears in the exhibition. As a busy placefor software art, what does it exemplify in relation to the theme ofthe show?OG: Runme developed most rapidly during early and mid naughties whensoftware art was in the period of bloom. In my view, which otherpeople of Runme might not share, it is included for the purposes ofremembering. Such remembering is about a somewhat missing round ofunderstanding of the 1990-s and early 2000-s which produced systems ofcoordinates and languages inhabited by, transformed, used and re-used,often rather violently, in the current sleek digital world.Here it probably makes sense to provide a short description of Runmefor the purposes of reminding: "Runme.org is a software art repositorycreated by all the people who used and contributed to it since late2002. It offers an interesting and slightly ironic perspective onsoftware art, and one that is rich in drawing upon programmers'cultures alongside the more self-consciously 'artistic' enquiries.Software art is a set of practices which focus on software as materialas well as a machine for making sense of the world we are all impliedin, and it works on destabilising some of its normalities. Hosting andlinking to over 400 projects, along with features and texts, Runme.orgis a project of self-organisation of an art current through the 'fun'of exploration that tries to be open, and its position of relativesuccess is due, among other, to the perspectival humour and inclusivedrive of its structure."MF: Is fun with software the only way to stop it driving you mad?OG: If you consider software to be the backbone of most managementtheory based processes that have an ambition to govern all aspects oflife in most developed countries (that's in fact the topic of your andAndy Goffey's Evil Media Studies book, right?) then fun with softwareis not only a way to stop losing sanity but also a way to sneak out,which is maybe one and the same thing as one needs to get out in orderto remain in.OG: I would like to say that this exhibition would never be possiblewithout two people which decided on producing it: Annet Dekker andAnnette Wolfsberger. Why did you decide to take it on?Annet Dekker: Software art is often still regarded as belonging tocreative industries or nerds and not to experimentation, art or fun.We very much believe in Olga's approach to software art and wantedto emphasise its importance for art as well as its relation to thestructure of society and show this to as many people as we could takeon.We also share your view on the lack of historical recognition orunderstanding and certainly visibility of these kinds of works. Wethink it is important to present these works and we are especiallyattracted by the way Olga has framed the exhibition, not looking at itfrom a deterministic technological point of view or a merely aestheticone but looking outside these almost traditional frameworks practicedin art and start with fun. It shows perfectly that art has a widerscope than is often addressed within the field. The focus on fun opensup the exhibition as well as the field of software art which for many,is a very closed territory consisting of and belonging to nerds,trained specialists or large business corporations.Similarly the concept of fun is not very much talked about and inrelation to software often only seen as being about play, gamingand interactivity. This narrow view totally misses the depth or theimplications software art and fun have. By presenting works that showdifferent sides of software brings in new relations that hopefullypeople will recognize as being closer to their own experience and atbest something they can actually influence if they wish to.OG: Annet, is there a relation between the theme and structure ofthe exhibition and the current layout of artistic, political, socialinterest in Holland and EU? Does the exhibitions' thematic fit acertain strategy or a missing discussion? Is there a way in which MUand Baltan laboratories saw themselves implied in such problematic?AD: I think it goes too far to connect the theme and structure to thecurrent political situation in the EU or the Netherlands - althoughthe issue of fun would in a way be a perfect vehicle to divert currentissues. It would certainly be a welcoming addition in todays politicalclimate as it may show things in a different perspective.As for the venues that were approached to show Funware we triedto find different environments to connect with and relate to ina manner that will open up the discussion of the influence ofsoftware. Arnofini with its history in performance and theatrewas an interesting point of departure to think of or invest withsoftware. MU on the other hand has an interest in visual cultureof the here and now but it is foremost the quirky and approachablemultidisciplinary approach of MU that made it a perfect place toconnect to. At the same time Eindhoven as a city has a long historyof innovation and research, where Phillips has its roots, and localorganisations are keen to work together. Together with MU and BaltanLaboratories we ended up organizing an exhibition, an artist inresidence (together with NIMk in Amsterdam and Piksel in Bergen,Norway), an extended educational programme and a symposium at one ofthe largest art&technology festivals taking place in Eindhoven, STRP.It's quite amazing that so many connections could be made in one city.In a way it reflects the diverse character of software art. In theend HardwareMedienKunstVerein brings these different perspectivestogether. HMKV has a long-term international reputation for displayof new developments in both art and technology By choosing a thematicapproach whereby technical art is seen as a means not as an end. Itis their topical and conceptual discussion of our contemporary worldbased increasingly on media and technological structures which is alsoreflected in Funware.MF: Bringing together pieces of work from different times implies somekind of preservation or reconstitution of some works. I wonder, isthere some kind of fun to this process itself?AD: Yes absolutely and in many different ways. It is the absurdismof trying to find a working plug, cable or network configurationjust in order to see the authentic working. This of course relatesto the practice of conservation in art where 'the authentic' isthe most valued. And especially with software art it has become abigger challenge to get to such an authentic experience. Rebuildingsoftware is not only about assembling the objects and maybe slightlyrestoring them, but also about reconstructing the code by doing. Thework by David Link is again a perfect example here. But there are ofcourse also other methods, which aim at representing the work throughdocumentation. Trying to reconstruct the context of the work anddoing the interviews reliving the experience can certainly be fun. Itbrings up aspects that were long forgotten but which when recounted,shed a totally new light on the work, also sometimes for the makers.At times, one could argue that the documentation of a work might bebetter than the actual work. For Funware we try all these differentmethods, just to see what it brings; and in case when things don'twork anymore we asked the artists to think of revisioning their work(as is the case with JODI's JET SET WILLY the making off). Making anew version by building on the past is a way to accept loss and atthe same time an attempt to prolong the work. But it all can be veryserious so it is important to keep a sense of humour as a means toprevent you from becoming too frantic. In the end we are presenting anew work by Dave Griffiths, Aymeric Mansoux and Marloes de Valk: Nakedon Pluto - a game in Facebook, I'm already looking forward to seeingthat being preserved!MF: One of the things that is the sheer variety of the formatsinvolved. Some projects entail custom hardware, of several differentsorts, that either 'quote' existing objects or invent new ones, othersuse conventional computing platforms. Some work exists fleetingly onnetworks of different kinds, one exists on paper only, others workwith cracked or manipulated games or use computers primarily aimed atchildren. How do you see this diversity?AD: To me this is the whole point of the show, to present the sheerdiversity of software art. It is not just the 'world of nerds', it'sall around you, much closer than you think, and it can be accessed inmany different ways and levels.OG: It is interesting that at a point in time, there was a discussionabout the problems of presenting new media art in a gallery space,as a lot of such presentation took the form of a computer sittingon the desk. It was somewhat surprising to see now, how easily avery wide range of methodologies and conceptual structures couldbe gathered together. Probably, an easy answer is that with such alargely retrospective show as Funware is, the body of great workaccumulated naturally exhibits a richness and diversity that onlyproves how interesting those years and explorations were.MF: Many mainstream accounts of computing propose that it becomesincreasingly calm, intuitive, fitting into the 'flow' of everyday lifeand enhancing it. Others propose that it is not simply functionalist,but becomes a kind of event in itself, full of lots of bijoux treats,as for instance with some smartphones as mentioned already, animatingdaily routines with pleasure-design and things to fill time. Suchfigurations are perhaps most evident in HCI and user experience designor other forms of human factors. The work in this show however tendsto step aside from these two poles in order to propose different kindsof thoughtfulness and experience in relation to software, each pieceof work having its own characteristics of excitement, awkwardness,time-requirements, involvement and so on. Some of them are exuberant,but others, melancholy. You show us that, in places, software cultureis, by several means, inexplicably richer than that which it isdesigned for. What might be the stakes in such explication?OG: I would not like to end up the interview by a pessimistic ranton the 'brave new world' that is speedily coming towards us, thougheveryone holds their breathe here in Britain, waiting for the cuts,new immigration rules, university tuition fees changes, and otherkinds of governmental announcements. Now, it becomes crystal clearthat a sheer possibility to play around, to do something useless thatmay become brilliant, to be obscure and absurd is fundamental to theproduction of culture we inhabit and the parts of it we admire, candisappear. This is a question of education, imagination, environment,ideology, time, idea of usefulness and of value, aesthetics and manyother spectra. Software culture is not different, in this sense, fromother domains. However, what is also possible is a new renaissancethrough the very renewing of the 'oppressed', as hard times are oftenvery interesting And here, software is different, in terms of thekinds of control possible and implemented, by the types of networkplatforms or hardware popular and desired and also by the depth of itsappropriation by the pure ideological management system of society.What can be done here now, remains an open question.Details:The Arnolfini edition of the show includes, 'Love Letter Generator' by David Link, Jodi's film 'All Wrongs Reversed (c) 1982', 'WIMP' by Laskin/Shulgin, 'Tempest for Eliza' by Eric Thiele, 'London.pl' by Harwood, 'Open Circuit' by Christoph Haag, Martin Rumori, Franziska Windisch & Ludwig Zeller and 'Runme.org'.Eindhoven's version of the show, produced by MU and Baltan laboratories, will be much larger and includes 'Auto Illustrator' by Adrian Ward, 'SVEN' by Amy Alexander, 'eRiceCooker' by Annina Ruest, 'Al Jazari 'by Dave Griffiths, 'Naked on Pluto' by Dave Griffiths, Aymeric Mansoux, and Marloes de Valk, 'wowPod' by Electroboutique, 'LOCUSOLUS' by Gazira Babeli, 'RETROYOU R/C STORY' by Joan Leandre, 'JET SET WILLY the making of' by JODI, 'Satromiser' by Jon Satrom and Ben Syverson, 'I/O/D 4: The Web Stalker' by I/O/D, 'Hardware Orchestra' by Carmen Weisskopf, Domagoj Smoljo and Roger Wigger, 'SimCopter' by RTMark, the above mentioned 'Open Circuit', 'Runme.org' and 'Textmode Quake'.The exhibition will then go to Hartware MedienKunstVerein in 2011.'Fun with Software'Arnolfini, Bristol, UK25 September - 21 November 2010http://www.arnolfini.org.uk/16 Narrow Quay, Bristol'Funware'12 November 2010 - 16 January 2011MU, Eindhoven (NL)www.mu.nlMUEmmasingel 205611 AZ EindhovenThe Netherlands'Funware Symposium'during STRP Festival27 November 2010 at BALTAN Laboratories in Eindhovenwww.strp.nlwww.baltanlaboratories.orgwww.mu.nl'Funware'Spring 2011HMKV, Dortmund (DE)www.hmkv.deHMKV at Dortmunder ULeonie-Reygers-Terrasse(formerly Brinkhoffst. 4)D-44137 Dortmund

http://cryptome.org/0002/cryptome-hack3.htmOctober 3, 2010Cryptome: Steps of the Cryptome hack on the morning of 2 October 2010.1. The Cryptome email account at Earthlink was accessed by unknown means and its access password changed.2. According to emailed notifications from Network Solutions (NSI) retreived after email access was restored, the hacker requested information about Cryptome's multiple accounts by using the email address.3. With a password guessed or stolen by unknown means the Cryptome.org management account at NSI was accessed.4. All 54,000 files (some 7GB) were deleted and the account password changed.5. NSI was sending emails of the account management modifications.6. The hack was discovered by lack of access to email or to the Cryptome.org NSI account.7. A call to NSI support restored all files from a back-up except for the previous two days.8. An Earthlink online support chat restored email access and showed the NSI emails about management changes.9. New passwords for Earthlink and NSI were set.10. Email is not stored at Earthlink. What undelivered email might have been deleted by the hacker is unknown, the NSI and a couple of spam emails were awaiting delivery.11. The other Cryptome accounts hosted by NSI do not seem to have been affected.12. This is the second shutdown hack in 14 years. Except the one by Microsoft abusing DMCA.<....>7 October 2010Most recent news reports are based on Wired's unsubstantiated allegations of the Cryptome hack, luridly smeared "a breach of Cryptome's secret-spilling files on sources." Wired is known for its hype and distortion of "evidence" and unsubstantiated allegations from publicity-seeking hackers

original at: http://bit.ly/dkHmHwTechnology = SalvationAn early investor in Facebook and the founder of Clarium Capital on thesubprime crisis and why American ingenuity has hit a dead end.By HOLMAN W. JENKINS JR.The housing bubble blew up so catastrophically because science andtechnology let us down. It blew up because our technocratic elite told usto expect an ever-wealthier future, and science hasn't delivered. Exceptfor computers and the Internet, the idea that we're experiencing rapidtechnological progress is a myth.Such is the claim of Peter Thiel, who has either blundered into enoughmoney that his crackpot ideas are taken seriously, or who is actually onto something. A cofounder of PayPal and an early investor in Facebook (hisstake was recently reported to be around 3%), Mr. Thiel is the unofficialleader of a group known as the "PayPal mafia," perhaps the most fecundinformal network of entrepreneurs in the world, behind companies asdiverse as Tesla (electric cars) and YouTube.Mr. Thiel, whose family moved from Germany when he was a toddler, studiedat Stanford and became a securities lawyer. After PayPal, he imparted asecond twist to his career by launching a global macro hedge fund, ClariumCapital. He now matches wits with some of the great macro investors, suchas George Soros and Stanley Druckenmiller, by betting on the direction ofworld markets.Those two realms of investing—narrow technology and broad macro—are behindhis singular diagnosis of our economic crisis. "All sorts of things arepossible in a world where you have massive progress in technology andrelated gains in productivity," he says. "In a world where wealth isgrowing, you can get away with printing money. Doubling the debt over thenext 20 years is not a problem.""This is where [today is] very different from the 1930s. In the '30s, theKeynesian stuff worked at least in the sense that you could print moneywithout inflation because there was all this productivity growthhappening. That's not going to work today."The people who bought subprime houses in Miami were betting ontechnological progress. They were betting on energy prices coming down andliving standards going up." They were betting, in short, on theproductivity gains to make our debts affordable.We'll get back to what all this means. Mr. Thiel wants to meet me at anoisy coffee shop near Union Square in Manhattan. Because a Fortune writerinvited to his condo wrote about his butler? "No," Mr. Thiel tells me."And I don't have a "butler."His mundane thoughts these days include whether Facebook should go public.Answer: Not anytime soon.As a general principle, he says, "It's somewhat dangerous to be a publiccompany that's succeeding in a context where other things aren't."On the specific question of a Facebook initial public offering, he harksback to the Google IPO in 2004. Many at the time said Google's debut hadreopened the IPO window that had closed with the bursting of the techbubble, and a flood of new tech companies would come to market. It didn'thappen.What Google showed, Mr. Thiel says, is that the "threshold" for goingpublic had ratcheted up in a Sarbanes-Oxley world. Even for awell-established, profitable company—which Google was at the time—the"cost-benefit trade-off" was firmly on the side of staying private for aslong as possible.Mr. Thiel was early enough in the Facebook story to see himself portrayedin the fictionalized movie about its birth, "The Social Network." (He'sthe stocky venture capitalist who implicitly—very implicitly—sets the ballrolling toward cutting out Facebook's allegedly victimized cofounder,Eduardo Saverin.)Today, Mr. Thiel (the real one) has no remit to discuss the company's manycontroversies. Suffice it to say, though, he believes the right company"won" the social media wars—the company that was "about meeting realpeople at Harvard."Its great rival, MySpace, founded in Los Angeles, "is about being someonefake on the Internet; everyone could be a movie star," he says. Heconsiders it "very healthy," he adds, "that the real people have won outover the fake people."Only one thing troubles him: "I think it's a problem that we don't havemore companies like Facebook. It shouldn't be the only company that'sdoing this well." Maybe this explains why he recently launched a $2million fund to support college kids who drop out to pursueentrepreneurial ventures.Mr. Thiel is phlegmatic about his own hedge fund, which took a nasty hitlast year after being blindsided by the market's partial recovery from thepanic of 2008. Listening between the lines, one senses he faces an uphillbattle to convince others of his long-term view, which he insists is "nothopelessly pessimistic.""People don't want to believe that technology is broken. . . .Pharmaceuticals, robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology—allthese areas where the progress has been a lot more limited than peoplethink. And the question is why."In true macro sense, he sees that failure as central to our current fiscalfix. Credit is about the future, he says, and a credit crisis is when thefuture turns out not as expected. Our policy leaders, though, have yet tosee this bigger picture. "Bernanke, Geithner, Summers—you may not agreewith the them ideologically, but they're quite good as macroeconomistsgo," Mr. Thiel says. "But the big variable that they're betting on is thatthere's all this technological progress happening in the background. Andif that's wrong, it's just not going to work. You will not get thisincredible, self-sustaining recovery.And President Obama? "I'm not sure I'd describe him as a socialist. Imight even say he has a naive and touching faith in capitalism. Hebelieves you can impose all sorts of burdens on the system and it willstill work."The system is telling him otherwise. Mankind, says Mr. Thiel, has noinalienable right to the progress that has characterized the last 200years. Today's heightened political acrimony is but a foretaste of the"grim Malthusian" politics ahead, with politicians increasingly trying toredistribute the fruits of a stagnant economy, loosing even more forces ofstagnation.Question: How can anyone know science and technology are under-performingcompared to potential? It's hard, he admits. Those who know—"universityprofessors, the entrepreneurs, the venture capitalists"—are "biased" infavor of the idea that rapid progress is happening, he says, becausethey're raising money. "The other 98%"—he means you and me, who in thisage of specialization treat science and technology as akin to magic—"don'tknow anything."But look, he says, at the future we once portrayed for ourselves in "TheJetsons." We don't have flying cars. Space exploration is stalled. Thereare no undersea cities. Household robots do not cater to our needs.Nuclear power "we should be building like crazy," he says, but we'resitting on our hands. Or look at today's science fiction compared to theoptimistic vision of the original "Star Trek": Contemporary sciencefiction has become uniformly "dystopian," he says. "It's about technologythat doesn't work or that is bad."The great exception is information technology, whose rapid advance is nofluke: "So far computers and the Internet have been the one sector immunefrom excessive regulation."Mr. Thiel delivers his views with an extraordinary, almost physical effortto put his thoughts in order and phrase them pithily. Somewhere in his 42years, he obviously discovered the improbability of getting a bold,unusual argument translated successfully into popular journalism.Mr. Thiel sees truth in three different analyses of our dilemma. Liberals,he says, blame our education system, but liberals are the last ones to fixit, just wanting to throw money at what he calls a "higher educationbubble.""University administrators are the equivalent of subprime mortgagebrokers," he says, "selling you a story that you should go into debtmassively, that it's not a consumption decision, it's an investmentdecision. Actually, no, it's a bad consumption decision. Most colleges arefour-year parties."Libertarians blame too much regulation, a view he also shares ("Get rid ofthe FDA," he says), but "libertarians seem incapable of winning elections.. . . There are a lot of people you can't sell libertarian politics to."A conservative diagnosis would emphasize an unwillingness to sacrifice,necessary for great progress, and once motivated by war. "Technology hasmade war so catastrophic," he says, "that it has unraveled the wholedesirability of it [as a spur to technology]."Mr. Thiel has dabbled in activism to the minor extent of co-hosting inManhattan last month a fund raiser for gay Republicans, but he has littletaste for politics. Still, he considers it a duty to put on the table theidea that technological progress has stalled and why. (To this end, he'sworking on a book with Russian chess champion and democracy activist GarryKasparov.)You don't have to agree with every jot to recognize that his view isessentially undisputable: With faster innovation, it would be easier todig out of our hole. With enough robots, even Social Security and Medicarebecome affordable.Mr. Thiel has not found any straight line, however, between his macroinsight and macro-investing success. "It's hard to know how to play themacro trend," he acknowledges. "I don't think it necessarily means youshould be short everything. But it does mean we're stuck in a period oflong-term stagnation."Some companies and countries will do better than others. "In China andIndia," he says, "there's no need for any innovation. Their business modelfor the next 20 years is copy the West." The West, he says, needs to do"new things." Innovation, he says, comes from a "frontier" culture, aculture of "exceptionalism," where "people expect to do exceptionalthings"—in our world, still an almost uniquely American characteristic,and one we're losing."If the universities are dominated by politicians instead of scientists,if there are ways the government is too inefficient to work, and we'rejust throwing good money after bad, you end up with a nearly revolutionarysituation. That's why the idea that technology is broken is taboo. Reallytaboo. You probably have to get rid of the welfare state. You have tothrow out Keynesian economics. All these things would not work in a worldwhere technology is broken," he says.Perhaps it really does fall to some dystopian science fiction writer totell us what such a world will be like—when nations are unraveling even asa cyber-nation called "Facebook" is becoming the most populous on theplanet.Mr. Jenkins writes the Journal's Business World column.

There has been much discussion in Canada about the Harper Conservatives and their strategy of controlling every communication between government and the media: illegally interfering with Access to Information requests, vetting by political staff of even the most obscure and inconsequential info requests like scientific findings about floods from 13,000 years ago.Harper has also taken the step of leaving cabinet meetings and the House of Commons via side exits etc to escape the scrum of reporters, and their traditional opportunity to ask tough questions of the PM. He has instituted a white-house-style speaker's list in the Parliamentary Press Gallery in order to take control of which media outlets may ask questions.Harper demands pages of documentation and planning for even the most minor of government rollouts (Media Event Proposals, see http://www.hilltimes.com/page/view/control-04-26-2010 OR http://tinyurl.com/2cpolba ), and forces civil servants to spend thousands of man-hours documenting the placement, size, and maintenance of signage promoting his government's Economic Action Plan (Canada's anti-recession stimulus spending program - see http://tinyurl.com/2caba5nhttp://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/09/06/conservatives-sign-count.html ).The internet strategy below may be a logical step in the evolution of government communications; but in a regime in which even the minutiae of press events are scrutinized by the centralized PMO, you can be sure this has not only the Harper stamp of approval, but that the message is painstakingly crafted by his office.from http://tinyurl.com/25rbq3vhttp://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/new-documents-shed-light-on-governments-online-battle-with-seal-hunt-opponents-104701689.htmlThe Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITIONNew documents shed light on government's online battle with seal hunt opponentsBy: Steve Lambert, The Canadian PressPosted: 11/10/2010 9:04 AM | Comments: 2They knew they were going into hostile territory, and it appears they didn't sway many minds, but federal employees are feeling pretty good about going head-to-head with critics of the seal hunt in online forums, Twitter tweets and the blog of a teenage girl.The pilot project, which ran last spring, could lead to more cases in which bureaucrats rebut government critics on websites big and small."The project was successful in that we tested, refined our processes and executed rapid response during the pilot," Claude Rochon, spokesman for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, wrote in an email."Discussions about pilot findings and next steps are taking place within DFAIT and across government."Documents obtained under the Access to Information Act by the International Fund for Animal Welfare, longtime critics of the seal hunt, show government employees posted on sites such as Vegansaurus, as well as small personal blogs, and also responded to Twitter messages.A Toronto-based company called Social Media Group was hired for $75,000 to monitor online chatter about the seal hunt and help the government correct what it perceived as misinformation ? suggestions that seals are an endangered species, for example, or that sealers are allowed to kill newborn white-coat pups.When one of the authors on Vegansaurus, a San-Francisco-based food website, called the seal hunt a genocide that threatened to decimate the herd, the government wrote back."Hi. My name is Martha and I'm an employee of the Government of Canada working on the seal file. While some may not agree with the harvest itself, it is worth noting that the seal population is healthy and abundant. The Northwest Atlantic harp seal population is currently estimated at 6.9 million animals ? more than triple the size of the herd in the 1970s."Martha McLean is deputy director of eCommunications in the Foreign Affairs Department. She also posted links to a government fact sheet about the seal hunt, but was met with a cool response."Great idea, Canada! Send an employee to try to justify seal slaughter ? oh pardon me, 'harvest' ? to a bunch of vegans on a vegan website," wrote a poster named theolivia.When a teenage girl in West Virginia wrote on her blog called gogreenveggiegirl that baby seals are killed for their white coats, another department employee named Elisa Kaltcheva responded by pointing out that the killing of white-coat seals has been illegal since 1987.And when a Twitter user named Bernoid alluded to a "kill quota for baby seals," an official in the Department of Fisheries and Oceans suggested the government respond by pointing out the ban on killing white coats.The International Fund for Animal Welfare was pleased to see that government officials have been upfront about their identities when they posted comments. But the group feels the government is in spin mode by posting links to government fact sheets instead of to independent scientific studies."They're not using the best available information. They're just sticking to their talking points, so I think it is just another propaganda machine," said Sheryl Fink, director of the fund's seal hunt campaign.The documents obtained by the fund show that bureaucrats considered some online chatter too inflammatory to respond to. At one online news site in the United States, people for and against the hunt were in a lengthy argument over whether seals were being skinned alive. The government decided to stay out of the debate, deeming the conversation "already heated and unreceptive."So far, the government's movement into the world of online debate has been somewhat tentative. Representatives have been posting single replies using a form-letter style of writing ? almost like a letter to the editor of a newspaper.But because online commentary can quickly become a back-and-forth argument, the government has to consider how far down the debate path it wants to go."I'm interested to discover how this pilot can help us articulate this (seal hunt) issue and to suggest ways for the (government of Canada) to move toward more of a dialogue-like engagement ? sometime down the road," Barry Nesbitt, another department eCommunications employee, wrote in an April 1 email to colleagues."My sense from today is that we have to find ways to identify individuals who want to discover content that exists outside their particular point of view/echo chamber of comfort. Then both parties have to determine to what extent we can have a real discussion with the hope that others will be drawn to the conversation."--* WHERE'S MY ARTICLE, WORLD?http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Flick_Harrison* FLICK's WEBSITE & BLOG: http://www.flickharrison.com

www.uniriot.orgToday, in Rome, hundreds of students stopped for several minutes inside themain station of the city, reading books to symbolize the end of educationand culture: budget cuts, lack of quality, privatization and precarity leaduniversity on a blind track!Rome- Termini station - 12 a.m.Among thousands of travellers, at first a whistle, than a metallic voicesaying "Trenitalia informs travellers train of university is on a blindtrack" [Trenitalia is the italian rail company]Immediately hundreds of students sat down blocking part of the station.All the students had a book to denounce budget cuts that are destroyinguniversity and research. Flash mob was welcomed by all people at the stationthat answered to students' claim with a long clapping.Here is the flier shared during the flash mob:*One destination: precarity.We do not accept it! Today we are here because we want to choose betweenseveral destinations and the only train we want to board: the one to takeback our future that they would steal from us! Tremonti and Gelmini(Ministers of Finance and Education) are demolishing school, university andresearch. They would see us going away, but we answer them that we stayhere, with our books, our dissent and our desire!**Next stop: thursday 14th OctoberLet's besiege the Parliament during the discussion of Gelmini's law toprevent its endorsement. *In the last two months several demonstrations, occupation and actions arespreading all over Italy as an answer to the reform that this week will bediscussed by the Parliament.Researchers and teachers stopped lessons for two weeks, wide assemblies tookplace in several italian universities and on 14th October students,researchers, teachers and professors will besiege the Parliament during thediscussion of the education reform.Then, on 16th October, students will demonstrates with other sectors ofsociety that are struggling against austerity: dismantling of welfare state,destruction of research and education system, austerity measure that make uspaying the permanent crisis, unemployment, raising of debt, destruction ofworkers right.The union of the factory workers, after a huge attack lead by the governmentand the italian industrial association, called for a national demo. At thesame time, students, precarious, migrants and researchers decided to takethe streets aiming to a huge and common space of struggle, whereas welfareagainst austerity, funding against privatization, education againstignorance are the only solution to fight crisis and restauration.*TAKE BACK OUR FUTURE!video and photosHERE<http://www.uniriot.org/uniriotII/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1949:roma-flash-mob-a-termini-qluniversita-e-su-un-binario-mortoqq&catid=85:comunicati&Itemid=279>*

Hello,as is often the case false representations do apply to those who are not present. The following bold and simple text does not prove this wrong. Nevertheless a sexy migrant background may result from efforts of academics or off-intellectuals who can not really cope with the situations of inner and outer borders as well as with their own limitated options of symbolic forms. In between two shows about Migration and Mobility[1] I have re-edited points, very sketchy though, which may brought up the the theme called Migration which some would euphemistically label a discourse -- a debate at issue.As a matter of fact toxic sludge with mining waste in Hungary causing death and spreading over Europe's river Danube is something else than a no border campaign (www.noborder.org) with demonstrations in Brussels. Anyhow the context is the same inasmuch as the borders a marked here as artificial limitations but defended by a Regime. The Film "Grossstadtzigeuner" ("Big City Gypsies") from László Moholy-Nagy was screened in the Collegium Hungaricum in Berlin last month, showing the big Roma Community in Berlin in 1932, few years before the catastrophe. There are no pictures to be found like these today I guess. But there is no need for fancy theory to realise that not only France is expelling them again, the people and with them the pictures.I would like to thank Mindaugas Gapsevicius for encouraging me to write this article below and his lecturer within a EU-Project for checking the writing (some errors may be left). The article was supposed to be published within a book but -- to overwork -- it now migrates to mailing lists and handouts._________________________[1] "The Tourist Syndrome" (www.transientspaces.org) ended last Sunday and "Migrating Art Academies" (www.migaa.eu) holds a conference next Friday and Saturday in Berlin. Matze Schmidt, 12.10.2010Bologna ProcessCurriculum Vitae< 1814 -1826 A Non-Euclidean geometry (Nikolai Lobachevsky, Carl Friedrich Gauss) questions which geometrical space best fits physical space.1825 Begin of the periodic economic crises in the most developed country at that time: Great Britain. The amount of exports falls below the total of 1824.1843 May 5th, opening of the rail lines Paris – Orleans and Paris – Rouen. The Parisian migrant Heinrich Heine says while overemphasising the loss of real space in a pretended Hyperspace of industrial media: "Space is killed by the railways, and we are left with time alone." At the end of the same year Heine visits Germany. This land is, at the time, a kind of confederation of countries (Deutscher Bund) but not yet a united nation before the Franco-Prussian War.1848 The _Manifesto of the Communist Party_ as issued by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels states that there is a World Market "for which the discovery of America paved the way".1863 United States President Abraham Lincoln issues the _Emancipation Proclamation_ during the American Civil War declaring the freedom of all slaves in any state of the Confederate States of America as a war measure of the industrialised north against the agricultural south.~ 1870 - 1900 Blues emerges, the music and reflection method in the spare time of black workers and 'post-slaves' within African-American communities in the Deep South of the United States.1914 - 1918 The so-called First World War reshapes Europe and more than 15 Million 'migrate' into graves.1922 El Lissitzky makes the collage and drawing "Vladimir Tatlin working on his Monument to the Third International". The Monument is also kown as "Tatlin's Tower" for Petrograd. The Third International aka "Commintern" was founded March 2-6, 1919 at a congress in Moscow.1929 ... The "Great Depression" takes place. This and the Dust Bowl in the American and Canadian prairie lands precipitates a high unemployment rate in the US (exceeding 20%) and a wave of national migration described in John Steinbeck's _The Grapes of Wrath_. The ensuing worldwide economic downturn in the 1930s may be seen as the trigger for developments which lead to the aggression of of Nazi Germany and the Second World War.1933 ... Jewish and other Diaspora is caused by the Shoah and progroms.1950s The German "Wirtschaftswunder" ("economic miracle") happens. The Volkswagen "Beetle", a car model from the Nazi Regime era, is the icon of West German reconstruction.1957 First postwar economical crisis (industrial output in developed capitalist countries declines 4 percent). Founding of the Situationist International (SI), not only "famous" for Psychogeography, Dérive and the critique against the Spectacle as the contemporary (20th century) form of capitalism.1950s/60s Profit Rates are all in all high. In Marx' Critique of Political Economy (Capital), the rate of profit (r) are measured as r = surplus-value / capital invested where surplus-value corresponds to unpaid labor in the production process or to profits, interest, and rent (property income). First mainly in the US and then in Great Britain and later global phenomenons like Pop and Pop Art affirm and subvert this conjuncture, NO!Art opposes.1962 Computer scientist J. C. R. Licklider discusses his concept for a "Intergalactic Computer Network" with other colleagues of the BBN Technologies company, a supplier of arms.1967 Negative rates of economic growth for the first time in Germany after the Second World War: -0,3 % (1967) and -1,3% (1975) growth rate of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).1970 The band Led Zeppelin records the "Immigrant Song" built on nordic myths in the lyrics and on a quasi-variant of Blues called Hard Rock. It was written during a tour of Iceland, Britain and Germany.1972 The concept of "deterritorialisation" is subsumed by Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari in _Anti-Oedipus_, a critique of capitalism as the super power and a turning away from the critique of political economy towards a non-linear sort of sub-and-super-structure of labor and libido. Deterritorialisation, the weakening of the ties of space and culture and economy is always accompanied by reterritorialization. There are missing links between deterritorialisation and Post-Fordism (which is however communicated as a kind of »De-Taylorisation« in the sector of production) and the terminology around the "Symbolic Worker", which is complexly put together and economically/politically speaking nothing more than an update of the mode of production based on new productive forces called the computer plus internet. Within intranets corporations tunnel outcomes of symbolic work. Universities maintain their own High Speed Computer Networks ever since the days of the ARPANET in the 1960s, the proto-internet as a synthesis of business, science and a monopoly on the use of force.1976 Drafts of the reduction of real wages by holding a reserve army of labor (unemployed) according to the OECD's "A Growth Scenario to 1980", a "Special Supplement to the Economic Outlook" from July 19, 1976 in consideration of declining rates of profit. Profit is the must for every single capital in competition with other capital. Competition means that firms have to invest in variable capital (wages etc. for workers) and constant capital (new machines, new material) progressively so as to not fall behind other competitors. This may result in the tendency for the rate of profit to fall because investments tend increase on the basis of new technologies and competition. This is not a vicious circle of logic but a step ladder. The OECD is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and is acting by reviews and forecasts, and through "soft law" for the market economy of all its member states, here: from welfare to workfare. Time of the Punk (Music) Explosion with referencies to the Situationists. According to legend Jimmy Page and Robert Plant (Led Zeppelin) are puzzled when visiting a Punk concert.Early 1980s Recession – Negative GDP growth in the USA. States begin to "pump" money into circulation.1980s & 1990s Exacerbated competition on the world market of single capital and national capital does not precipitate a big general economical crisis but has certain downscaling showing a capped economic crisis cycle. According to the International Labour Organisation growth rates of the World GDP in the early 1980s occasionally fell below 1%, in the mid-1980s and below the 3% mark at the beginning of the 21st Century.~ 1991 For the first time the author about a "Hypermobile Class" which is naturally not a 'classical class' in terms of economics but a social class, a social stratification, a part of the class of workers or employees that is highly educated. In fact this group may be described as a sub-group or form of the working class enjoying a sort of cosmopolitan status, a group of privileged subjects, freelancers who are able to switch nations (the formal formation of national capital) and shift cultures (the habitual room of meanings inside a nation or a region). This circumstance causes a drift in identities.1992 _Diversi, ma insieme_ [Different but together] from Milan write: "Inside the Fortress Europe a double function is intended for immigrants: an 'economical' role within the framework of the projects of the enterprisers for a deregulation of the labor market – here they have to fill the gaps of the shadow economy and a 'political-social' function as 'outer enemy', against whom a future european people's community is to form and to mobilise."1999 ... Signing of the _Bologna Declaration_ by Ministers of Education from 29 European (and beyond) countries creating a "European Higher Education Area" (EHEA) to enhance the competitiveness of a realm inclusive Island, Turkey and Russia and other states by cutting down costs. The EHEA envisages among other things "to facilitate mobility of students" and "prepare students for their future careers and for life as active citizens in democratic societies". The label "Bologna Process" for this undertaking is quite a symbolic one since Bologna is home to the oldest university in the Western world founded in 1088. Thus it adresses a historic layer as well as the discourse of a European centralisation on the superstructure that seeks to avoid Brain Drain. It appears as a reaction to the Human Capital Flight or emigration of an elite-to-be (including a sub-elite formed by the separating education system with bachelor and/or master degrees). The concept of deterritorialization does not seem to fit here. Article 14 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union guarantees the right to education. Of course the wage shares in the Euro Area and the USA as a percentage of GDP have decreased since the early 1990s, especially in Europe – from nearly 62% (1991) to about 57% (2005) with a continual downward trend. This, along with the general profit squeeze and progressively falling GDPs, raises costs for the social systems across the European Union (EU) occuring in unemployment and cutting welfare and social-security payments and seems to affect the educational system in the EU as a whole and fundamental rights and duties of citizens.2000 - 2009 The EU de facto reintroduces the death penalty according to the Explanation 3. aka "'negative’ definitions" of "Article 2: Right to Life" of the _Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union_ regarding sentence 2 ("No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.") referring to the European Convention on Human Rights from 1953 ("The death penalty shall be abolished. No one shall be condemned to such penalty or executed."): "Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this article [Art. 2] when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary: [...] * in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection." This information can be found via deeplink (a hyperlink that points to a specific page or file) to a PDF file named "Explanations relating to the complete text [...]" within the webpage containing the Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. This negative definition entered formally as part of the law (!) into force on December 1, 2009 after the Treaty of Lisbon. It is an expression of the fear of social frictions.2002 "Alpha 3.4", the webwalking project is presented by tsunamii.net at the Documenta 11 in Kassel (Germany) in 2002. Tien Wei Woon, Charles Lim Yi Young and others from Singapore extrapolate by means of an online GPS-mapping the relations of the physical geographic space order to the order of the switching of IPs (Internet Protocol), the adresses in the locating system for dispatching within the WWW.2003 Heath Bunting and others in 2003 offer "tour de fence" trainings in the "real world" related to the utopia of a virtuality demarcated internet or media space without borders. Remember that Singaporean studends may easily get a (state) grant but they have to returm to their home state.2004 About 14 billion US-Dollars are retransfered to Mexiko by migrant workers.2006 Le Monde publishes photos by Juan Medina (Reuters) on the 10th of May showing an African refugee crawling through the rows of holiday makers on the beach of Fuerteventura, one of the Canary Islands in the Atlantic Ocean, off the west coast of Africa.2008 A crisis of overproduction, which began in the construction and real estate sector, leads to unsold goods and is concealed by a "Financial Crisis" (banks deny credits to banks). It is followed by huge State Debts in most developed countries as a result of the turnover of the credit system into the monetary system (Business-to-business transaction invoices have to be settled with cash not credit). This results i giant state credits for the financial sector: according to the International Monetary Fund (2009) up to over 80% in France, over 100% in Italy and to over 220% in Japan of GDP for the year of 2010.2010 - now The author Matze Schmidt outlines a simple but sophisticated list of historical data, dates and terms within a range of subjects from economics to migration in western perspective entitled the _Curriculum Vitae of Bologna Process_, as if it were the CV of a subject or persona but lacking a comprehensive listing of personal history or any real personal information. The author is a 'post-heroic' factor, it is a non-dead fact. An acquaintance of the author says, that nobody is interested in _Second Life_ as a setting for a global non-national territory anymore except a friend of a friend, known to the author as well, who still believes in 3D. Beliefs in a technology driven intergalactic "Social Galaxy" seem to collapse because of contradictions with restraints. Whereas for instance with Google's technologies there is evidence to presume that sociation is happening. Export surplusses seem to be dearly bought with budget cuts though and even Google has dismissed staff. Prof Gundolf S. Freyermuth, a self-described "digital immigrant" (person born before ca. 1980) as opposed to a "digital native" (person born after ca. 1980) suggested during an interview on the 'old' medium of radio on August 19 that cultures in nations which are open to what he calls the "digital future" will be more competitive. The phrase "digital immigrant" reproduces an ethnogical terminology and thinking. As a consequence of this a radical immigrant from the pre-personal-computer time-space who immigrated into the current 'digital' time-space had to settle in the most competitive territories of today – just as the digital native. One can call this the integrated but inter-national area. The SI called it the spectacle. Freyermuth has a ranch in Arizona.(c) 2010 n0name# 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://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime< at >kein.org

[digested < at > nettime]----- Forwarded message from | f | | | 3 <n2o-ntPqO0vKNi+Bik42HM7KXg< at >public.gmane.org> -----From: | f | | | 3 <n2o-ntPqO0vKNi+Bik42HM7KXg< at >public.gmane.org>Subject: \\ DJ.Spooky aka DJ. D.U.M.B_A.Y --- dz.zputn!k !z 1x fn jankeeDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:03:42 +0300To: nettime-l-fO7mttO5ZDI< at >public.gmane.orgdj. spooky had 1x go < at > thinking:h - Yo. Zpuuut.kiii. Yuaz'a !gno.rant mo-4 End nooooo D.Z. ! d?.nut luki doun doun daun on jank+e URA.p.p.p.p.erz http://0f0003.com/data/pikz/isea09/Seriously Spook.e - Whodaftaughtya2thinkb +?U.R.A.F.D!Z.GRRRASZ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WQE_vZnUCc&feature=related+ \ \ \? F \ ? ? \ ? 3 \ \ \ n f : \ kK a n i e t z fF i l m a \ NU VA LASATI. PRO.gre.SS = INEVITABLE | 3 k ? r 0 0 F 03 . k ? m 0----- End forwarded message ---------- Forwarded message from | f | | | 3 <n2o-ntPqO0vKNi+Bik42HM7KXg< at >public.gmane.org> -----From: | f | | | 3 <n2o-ntPqO0vKNi+Bik42HM7KXg< at >public.gmane.org>Subject: \\ funwareDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:23:14 +0300To: nettime-l-fO7mttO5ZDI< at >public.gmane.orgAKA 'Fun' with Public / Free Money.You 2 institutional parasites de ordinul 3 need 2 find something productive 2 doinstead of defrauding the masses like 2 neo-liberal degenerate life f.orms. dzat u r.Since undoubtedly you're 'physically challenged' give pula.fashion a try.I bet MF.-- SSUKc_IT+C \+\ | | kons stency = dze l!m!t ov democrassy || ||9||[p-un_kT-pr_o-T?k_oL] ? f ? ? ? 3 || herausgegeben v?m !nternat!onalen!nst!tut f:ur ordnung |+| d!sz!pl!n : / / www.0f0003.comOlga Goriunova is curator and Annet Dekker is co-producer (as partof aaaan.net) of the multi-venue exhibition 'Fun With Software' (inBristol) and 'Funware' (in Eindhoven and Dortmund). The exhibitionhas many aspects to it, being in some ways a retrospective of certainstrands in software art, a set of propositions about the nature ofdigital culture and an argument, made through the conjunction ofworks, for a fundamental appreciation of fun as an inventive livelyforce in all forms of life.This discussion was carried out by email in late September and earlyOctober 2010.Matthew Fuller: 'Fun' is an interesting term to use, it is somehow,juvenile, gleeful, grinning, something not as 'serious' as humour,or jokes, which have their literature and interpretations, nor doesit necessarily correspond to the policy scam of 'creativity', or theindustrial dimension of games. But yet, there's a quality of fun whichlinks all these things and you have assembled some exemplary 'cases'of them here. What forms does fun appear in, in the exhibition?Olga Goriunova: 'Fun' for me is a force, an energy, an unfolding ofa certain ensemble of curiosity, inappropriateness, going beyond anddeviating from what is laid out or logically consequential to thecurrent condition. Such an energy can be easily recognised in science,in art, as something traditionally acknowledged and aspired for,though more recently endangered through neoliberal framing in terms ofusefulness if not direct profit.As such, the idea behind the show is to think how freaks run theworld. The fun they have when poking at the screens of reality todiscover other realities is what I imagine the concept of fun isabout. Now, beyond shared qualities, there is a distinctiveness of funin relation to, broadly speaking, computation and computers. Fun herebecomes related to formal logic and repetition, to the question ofwhere software starts and ends, to mental states, to what operationsit can carry out on the world, to the cultures and usages of software,to its building upon itself, to its aesthetics. Humour often adjoinsfun when software, but also its realm of production and operation,is tested against dominance, boredom, madness, power; the fun I aminterested in can also be absurd rather than jolly.Fun lets one see the territories that are in-between computer scienceand digital folklore, the art and cultures of using conventionalsoftware. Probably, the juvenile aspect you are talking about is theunseriousness of fun, which is the bravery generally ascribed toyouth to ignore the often self-inflicted order of 'seriousness'. Suchseriousness is the effect of power systems, of orders of rationalityproducing forces that act in a manner that is 'more royal than theking'. And certainly, fun can be and is used then to update suchorders to complexify the systems of reinforcement.The exhibition tries to attend to different aspects of fun. DavidLink reconstructs the 'Love Letter Generator' written in 1952 byChristopher Strachey, with Alan Turing, that predates all earlygenerally known text generating algorithms. It produced beautifullyabsurd love letters on a Ferranti Mark 1 - one of the first electroniccomputers. . On production, the poems were hung around the walls ofManchester University, mystifying the students who came there todo something very serious. The work presents the complete workingmemory and processor of 'Love Letter Generator' which can be seenon 12 cathode ray tubes which the Ferranti used for memory, storingbits in phosphor. This work will be shown in the Arnolfini, Bristol,and for Eindhoven, David is working on 'Draughts'. Here is how Daviddescribes it: ' In 1947, the electrical engineers Frederic Williamsand Tom Kilburn succeeded at the University of Manchester to constructthe first reliable means for the volatile storage of information --the Williams tube. Two years later, the device had evolved into theManchester Mark I, arguably the first computer worldwide. The earliestmajor program for this machine was written in 1951 by an outsider, theschool teacher Christopher Strachey, who had obtained the technicalmanual from a former fellow student, Alan Turing. The task of thissoftware was not to calculate the trajectory of missiles, but to playthe game of draughts (checkers).'In these various versions of the exhibition and with the overallconcept, I try to present different time periods, problems throughwhich fun manifests, be they visual aesthetic or functional, subjectsor objects that have agency, cultures of producing fun and moments atwhich it can emerge.MF: Given these different time periods, how might you perhapscharacterize them, how does the possibility of fun proliferate ordiminish at different times in relation to specific kinds of computingculture?OG: This is a question to a broadminded historian. However, onecould certainly say that there is a different sensibility to everytime period, however hard it can be to give the exact dating. Here,David Link's work comments of the 1950s and challenges the view thatcomputing was always heavily dominated by the military interests.Strachey and Turing, as demonstrated in the show, were also impliedin the kinds of making sense of the world through the funny, peculiarand the absurd. Computing of the 1950s and 1960s still remained quiteclosed for wider tinkering. The 1970s and 1980s brought around homecomputers and 'script kiddies' avant la lettre, and a new era of funbegun, less like the absurdist fun of, say, the writer Daniil Kharms,but more homebrew and hands-on, with a distinctive materiality andaesthetic that is alive up to this moment. The 1990s were the yearsof the explosion of digital avant-gardes, very similar to the Soviet1920s, where similar drives of inventing and establishing new orderscould be sensed in unrelated domains and artists, computer labs ofUniversities, companies made up the languages of today.But again, if one changes the viewpoint and looks at the historyof computer science, a different timeline could be developed, withbrilliant humanist and humourous programmers, such as Dijkstra comingto the fore, whose acts and breakthroughs stand as milestones.MF: The first stage of the show, which has just opened at theArnolfini in Bristol, proposes perhaps a more 'Geeky' aspect of fun,that suggests an interest in code, devices, unexpected solutions tonewly imagined problems. Is there a particular relation to fun in geekcultures you are interested in here?OG: Certainly, there is a particular relation to fun in geek cultures.There is professional humour, the insider jokes, the obsessionand dedication, cultures of enquiry and leisure, of building andmaintaining the structures. I guess what interests me in this respectis the artistic nature of geekiness, for instance, the way in whichobjects and processes, projects that are thrilling artistic works areproduced within systems of coordinates which are not interested in artat all.The proximity of ways of working and imagining, of letting thingsto be seen and experienced that are offered in certain 'geeky' workand art work makes sensible certain kinds of forces that traverseunrelated areas in making the world up.Take 'Tempest for Eliza' by Eric Thiele. This project is done by aprogrammer 'for fun'. It is there to explore the reality of TEMPEST- a secret service code word coined in the late 60-s - early 70-sfor the using of and defending against 'compromising emissions'.Electronic devices emit electromagnetic waves, which can be caught inorder for the original data to be reconstructed. Tempest for Elizademonstrates this in a very precise manner: the software producesimages ('one for each note in the song'), which are displayed by thecomputer monitor, which sends electromagnetic waves of very highfrequencies, which are then caught by short wave AM radio. Here, thethoughtfulness and irony of the project are supported by the formalistcoherency of the images produced; and the seemingly non-purposefulusage of a computer reveals the multi-layeredness and complexity ofits materiality.The best examples of fun in geek cultures offer exactly that elegantcomplexity at the level of formalist qualities, meanings, frameworks,mixed with non-pretentiousness. As statements and ways of seeing, theyare laborious, laconic and exact, like haiku.MF: As we've said, the show includes work from several time periods,things that operate as art, but also under other rubrics outside ofart. Elsewhere, the idea of 'Digital Folk' is one way in which youhave spoken about certain computing cultures, the sensibilities activehere cross in and out of art, particular kinds of technicity. The showfeels refreshingly unconstrained in this way...OG: As related to the question above, digital folk is a phenomenonthat draws heavily on geek cultures. At the same time, there is asense in which digital folk - a variety of cultures that use, adapt,produce software that makes and 'changes' sense in relation to labourconditions, states of work, certain aesthetic normalities, softwareoperations and allowances, always stay minor.Digital folklore still awaits its dedicated scholar while certaintimes and kinds of it are becoming lost. At the same time, a part ofit, along with software art, made its way into the world of iPhoneapplications where it is often detached from its operationality, ofthe ways in which it had a relation to the modes in which an OS worksor hangs, to the joint subject formed in-between a desktop computerand its tense user.MF: The Runme.org site also appears in the exhibition. As a busy placefor software art, what does it exemplify in relation to the theme ofthe show?OG: Runme developed most rapidly during early and mid naughties whensoftware art was in the period of bloom. In my view, which otherpeople of Runme might not share, it is included for the purposes ofremembering. Such remembering is about a somewhat missing round ofunderstanding of the 1990-s and early 2000-s which produced systems ofcoordinates and languages inhabited by, transformed, used and re-used,often rather violently, in the current sleek digital world.Here it probably makes sense to provide a short description of Runmefor the purposes of reminding: "Runme.org is a software art repositorycreated by all the people who used and contributed to it since late2002. It offers an interesting and slightly ironic perspective onsoftware art, and one that is rich in drawing upon programmers'cultures alongside the more self-consciously 'artistic' enquiries.Software art is a set of practices which focus on software as materialas well as a machine for making sense of the world we are all impliedin, and it works on destabilising some of its normalities. Hosting andlinking to over 400 projects, along with features and texts, Runme.orgis a project of self-organisation of an art current through the 'fun'of exploration that tries to be open, and its position of relativesuccess is due, among other, to the perspectival humour and inclusivedrive of its structure."MF: Is fun with software the only way to stop it driving you mad?OG: If you consider software to be the backbone of most managementtheory based processes that have an ambition to govern all aspects oflife in most developed countries (that's in fact the topic of your andAndy Goffey's Evil Media Studies book, right?) then fun with softwareis not only a way to stop losing sanity but also a way to sneak out,which is maybe one and the same thing as one needs to get out in orderto remain in.OG: I would like to say that this exhibition would never be possiblewithout two people which decided on producing it: Annet Dekker andAnnette Wolfsberger. Why did you decide to take it on?Annet Dekker: Software art is often still regarded as belonging tocreative industries or nerds and not to experimentation, art or fun.We very much believe in Olga's approach to software art and wantedto emphasise its importance for art as well as its relation to thestructure of society and show this to as many people as we could takeon.We also share your view on the lack of historical recognition orunderstanding and certainly visibility of these kinds of works. Wethink it is important to present these works and we are especiallyattracted by the way Olga has framed the exhibition, not looking at itfrom a deterministic technological point of view or a merely aestheticone but looking outside these almost traditional frameworks practicedin art and start with fun. It shows perfectly that art has a widerscope than is often addressed within the field. The focus on fun opensup the exhibition as well as the field of software art which for many,is a very closed territory consisting of and belonging to nerds,trained specialists or large business corporations.Similarly the concept of fun is not very much talked about and inrelation to software often only seen as being about play, gamingand interactivity. This narrow view totally misses the depth or theimplications software art and fun have. By presenting works that showdifferent sides of software brings in new relations that hopefullypeople will recognize as being closer to their own experience and atbest something they can actually influence if they wish to.OG: Annet, is there a relation between the theme and structure ofthe exhibition and the current layout of artistic, political, socialinterest in Holland and EU? Does the exhibitions' thematic fit acertain strategy or a missing discussion? Is there a way in which MUand Baltan laboratories saw themselves implied in such problematic?AD: I think it goes too far to connect the theme and structure to thecurrent political situation in the EU or the Netherlands - althoughthe issue of fun would in a way be a perfect vehicle to divert currentissues. It would certainly be a welcoming addition in todays politicalclimate as it may show things in a different perspective.As for the venues that were approached to show Funware we triedto find different environments to connect with and relate to ina manner that will open up the discussion of the influence ofsoftware. Arnofini with its history in performance and theatrewas an interesting point of departure to think of or invest withsoftware. MU on the other hand has an interest in visual cultureof the here and now but it is foremost the quirky and approachablemultidisciplinary approach of MU that made it a perfect place toconnect to. At the same time Eindhoven as a city has a long historyof innovation and research, where Phillips has its roots, and localorganisations are keen to work together. Together with MU and BaltanLaboratories we ended up organizing an exhibition, an artist inresidence (together with NIMk in Amsterdam and Piksel in Bergen,Norway), an extended educational programme and a symposium at one ofthe largest art&technology festivals taking place in Eindhoven, STRP.It's quite amazing that so many connections could be made in one city.In a way it reflects the diverse character of software art. In theend HardwareMedienKunstVerein brings these different perspectivestogether. HMKV has a long-term international reputation for displayof new developments in both art and technology By choosing a thematicapproach whereby technical art is seen as a means not as an end. Itis their topical and conceptual discussion of our contemporary worldbased increasingly on media and technological structures which is alsoreflected in Funware.MF: Bringing together pieces of work from different times implies somekind of preservation or reconstitution of some works. I wonder, isthere some kind of fun to this process itself?AD: Yes absolutely and in many different ways. It is the absurdismof trying to find a working plug, cable or network configurationjust in order to see the authentic working. This of course relatesto the practice of conservation in art where 'the authentic' isthe most valued. And especially with software art it has become abigger challenge to get to such an authentic experience. Rebuildingsoftware is not only about assembling the objects and maybe slightlyrestoring them, but also about reconstructing the code by doing. Thework by David Link is again a perfect example here. But there are ofcourse also other methods, which aim at representing the work throughdocumentation. Trying to reconstruct the context of the work anddoing the interviews reliving the experience can certainly be fun. Itbrings up aspects that were long forgotten but which when recounted,shed a totally new light on the work, also sometimes for the makers.At times, one could argue that the documentation of a work might bebetter than the actual work. For Funware we try all these differentmethods, just to see what it brings; and in case when things don'twork anymore we asked the artists to think of revisioning their work(as is the case with JODI's JET SET WILLY the making off). Making anew version by building on the past is a way to accept loss and atthe same time an attempt to prolong the work. But it all can be veryserious so it is important to keep a sense of humour as a means toprevent you from becoming too frantic. In the end we are presenting anew work by Dave Griffiths, Aymeric Mansoux and Marloes de Valk: Nakedon Pluto - a game in Facebook, I'm already looking forward to seeingthat being preserved!MF: One of the things that is the sheer variety of the formatsinvolved. Some projects entail custom hardware, of several differentsorts, that either 'quote' existing objects or invent new ones, othersuse conventional computing platforms. Some work exists fleetingly onnetworks of different kinds, one exists on paper only, others workwith cracked or manipulated games or use computers primarily aimed atchildren. How do you see this diversity?AD: To me this is the whole point of the show, to present the sheerdiversity of software art. It is not just the 'world of nerds', it'sall around you, much closer than you think, and it can be accessed inmany different ways and levels.OG: It is interesting that at a point in time, there was a discussionabout the problems of presenting new media art in a gallery space,as a lot of such presentation took the form of a computer sittingon the desk. It was somewhat surprising to see now, how easily avery wide range of methodologies and conceptual structures couldbe gathered together. Probably, an easy answer is that with such alargely retrospective show as Funware is, the body of great workaccumulated naturally exhibits a richness and diversity that onlyproves how interesting those years and explorations were.MF: Many mainstream accounts of computing propose that it becomesincreasingly calm, intuitive, fitting into the 'flow' of everyday lifeand enhancing it. Others propose that it is not simply functionalist,but becomes a kind of event in itself, full of lots of bijoux treats,as for instance with some smartphones as mentioned already, animatingdaily routines with pleasure-design and things to fill time. Suchfigurations are perhaps most evident in HCI and user experience designor other forms of human factors. The work in this show however tendsto step aside from these two poles in order to propose different kindsof thoughtfulness and experience in relation to software, each pieceof work having its own characteristics of excitement, awkwardness,time-requirements, involvement and so on. Some of them are exuberant,but others, melancholy. You show us that, in places, software cultureis, by several means, inexplicably richer than that which it isdesigned for. What might be the stakes in such explication?OG: I would not like to end up the interview by a pessimistic ranton the 'brave new world' that is speedily coming towards us, thougheveryone holds their breathe here in Britain, waiting for the cuts,new immigration rules, university tuition fees changes, and otherkinds of governmental announcements. Now, it becomes crystal clearthat a sheer possibility to play around, to do something useless thatmay become brilliant, to be obscure and absurd is fundamental to theproduction of culture we inhabit and the parts of it we admire, candisappear. This is a question of education, imagination, environment,ideology, time, idea of usefulness and of value, aesthetics and manyother spectra. Software culture is not different, in this sense, fromother domains. However, what is also possible is a new renaissancethrough the very renewing of the 'oppressed', as hard times are oftenvery interesting And here, software is different, in terms of thekinds of control possible and implemented, by the types of networkplatforms or hardware popular and desired and also by the depth of itsappropriation by the pure ideological management system of society.What can be done here now, remains an open question.Details:The Arnolfini edition of the show includes, 'Love Letter Generator' by David Link, Jodi's film 'All Wrongs Reversed (c) 1982', 'WIMP' by Laskin/Shulgin, 'Tempest for Eliza' by Eric Thiele, 'London.pl' by Harwood, 'Open Circuit' by Christoph Haag, Martin Rumori, Franziska Windisch & Ludwig Zeller and 'Runme.org'.Eindhoven's version of the show, produced by MU and Baltan laboratories, will be much larger and includes 'Auto Illustrator' by Adrian Ward, 'SVEN' by Amy Alexander, 'eRiceCooker' by Annina Ruest, 'Al Jazari 'by Dave Griffiths, 'Naked on Pluto' by Dave Griffiths, Aymeric Mansoux, and Marloes de Valk, 'wowPod' by Electroboutique, 'LOCUSOLUS' by Gazira Babeli, 'RETROYOU R/C STORY' by Joan Leandre, 'JET SET WILLY the making of' by JODI, 'Satromiser' by Jon Satrom and Ben Syverson, 'I/O/D 4: The Web Stalker' by I/O/D, 'Hardware Orchestra' by Carmen Weisskopf, Domagoj Smoljo and Roger Wigger, 'SimCopter' by RTMark, the above mentioned 'Open Circuit', 'Runme.org' and 'Textmode Quake'.The exhibition will then go to Hartware MedienKunstVerein in 2011.'Fun with Software'Arnolfini, Bristol, UK25 September - 21 November 2010http://www.arnolfini.org.uk/16 Narrow Quay, Bristol'Funware'12 November 2010 - 16 January 2011MU, Eindhoven (NL)www.mu.nlMUEmmasingel 205611 AZ EindhovenThe Netherlands'Funware Symposium'during STRP Festival27 November 2010 at BALTAN Laboratories in Eindhovenwww.strp.nlwww.baltanlaboratories.orgwww.mu.nl'Funware'Spring 2011HMKV, Dortmund (DE)www.hmkv.deHMKV at Dortmunder ULeonie-Reygers-Terrasse(formerly Brinkhoffst. 4)----- End forwarded message ---------- Forwarded message from | f | | | 3 <n2o-ntPqO0vKNi+Bik42HM7KXg< at >public.gmane.org> -----From: | f | | | 3 <n2o-ntPqO0vKNi+Bik42HM7KXg< at >public.gmane.org>Subject: Rapists / Parasites of the World, Raped by other Rapists / ParasitesDate: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 01:04:39 +0300To: nettime-l-fO7mttO5ZDI< at >public.gmane.orgUnfortunately for you, the entire event was paid for by tax payers.You can pose as 'artists' and 'hackers' but in reality you're domesticatedpets kept alive by the system you oppose.And unfortunately, many of you have a v.unhealthy life style thatthankfully (for you) isn't shared by the tax payers who finance youelse the parasitical relationship would conclude.Imagine that. Tell those 'artists' that unless they also become 'academic supervisors' like youin the real world Rape carries consequences.Better yet, since you're so cool write software that rapes not only websites but the entire world.This way your students can practice for their future 'jobs'Don't surrender. YOU can do anything ... so long as the tax payers finance your 'art'your 'business'. your 'politics'. the PERPETUAL PROSTITUTION AND RAPE OF THE WORLD is permissibleImagine that. A World Where Prostitution and Rape are Ubiquitous.Not only that, but where the victims must Enjoy it and Show itlest the Rapists / Pimps are traumatized .... the poor 'artists'Because ...Because ... the difference between you and the larger RAPISTS / PIMPS / PARASITES is scale.You are a mirror of the degenerate thinking that goes in board rooms and congresses.You are the VIRUS + the ILLNESS = SIMPLY.UNCONSCIOUS.RAPISTS + PIMPSIf the 'professors' are SIMPLY.UNCONSCIOUS hopefully the students will evolve beyond the nematode stage.------- End forwarded message -----