Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2004 June
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
2003 October
2003 September
2003 August
2003 July
My Links
Jill Walker's blog- media/game theory
New Zealand Blogs
MediaChannel.org
Torill Mortensen's blog- "thinking with my fingers"- MUDS/Games?Media
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| Are cyborgs among us? |
| 07.29.03 (3:51 pm) [edit] |
I read a article out of our reader that talked about comic characters and the different types of 'cyborg' the author put them in. What intersted me was the most basic kind where some characters either had a basic implant ie Wolverine or they wore a detachable suit that increased their physical human abilities ie Batman. This got me thinking about real life situations and that many humans could already be called cyborgs according to the article. I mean there are alot of people on earth with an artifical implant of some sort, I saw a girl on the news lately with a growth problem in one leg and doctors replaced a section of bone with a newly developed metal 'bone' that can be extended by putting her leg in a machine and with the use of magnets make it longer as she grows. So is she human or is she now a cyborg? What about the issue of a suit - If we go on the articles perspective I would say soilders would be cyborgs as there suits can withstand a bullet but like a comic book character they are still not indestuctable suits. Where would we draw a line of what is cyborg and what is human?
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| myth and monsters |
| 07.27.03 (6:44 pm) [edit] |
There is a improv theatre exercise in which you look at any object in the room and call out a totally different name for it. Do this over and over with different objects. It is not easy! We invariably hook into associations- calling the floor the ceiling - calling a knife a spoon.
Myth is like that. It is an elaborate way of "naming" our existance. Like calling the pot a pot- we "name" our existence with total crap like (the matrix)"the beautiful woman (Princess Trinity) kisses the dead beautiful guy (Prince Neo) and he is reborn as "the one" (Jesus) and saves the world for Humanity and our right to bear weapons ( Uzi submachine guns)" The "matrix" starts of with this great idea (we are slaves) and then proves it by reverting to a potpouri of Hollywood myth. We are slaves to formula storylines. "Myth" itself is our cage.
"The future is necessarily monstrous: the figure of the future, that is, that which can only be surprising, that for which we are not prepared, you see, is heralded by species of monsters. A future that would not be monstrous would not be a future; it would already be a predictable, calculable, and programmable tomorrow. All experience open to the future is prepared or prepares itself to welcome the monstrous arrivant, to welcome it, that is, to accord hospitality to that which is absolutely foreign or strange, but also, one must add, to try to domesticate it, that is, to make it part of the household and have it assume the habits, to make us assume new habits. This is the movement of culture. " J. Derrida. (Writing and Difference)
The myths I see don't jibe with my experiences. Yet some crappy part of us still believes them. (marc)
|
|
|
| |
| interface direction |
| 07.27.03 (5:16 pm) [edit] |
My experience of interface between humans and the computer often leaves me feeling more restricted by the technology than liberated.
In reference to Lars question: will a network of AI start controlling humans, resulting in an interface whereby humans recieve instructions rather than give them - I also would suggest that this is already happening.
For example the increased use of technology in the arts (in institutional environments at least).
The proliferation of digital technologies, multimedia environments, new software/hardware etc. with relation to creative practices can be seen as both expanding possibilities whilst perhaps limiting creative outcomes.
Using packages such as Photoshop daily I often find that my actual work does not really mirror my intended compositions. Whereas when I pick up a pencil to sketch an idea the result is a much more 'accurate' what I visualised.
Things that I would like to achieve with the computer are often difficult or even impossible due to either my own lack of technological knowledge, the limits of the program or the computers memory. In this way I would suggest that whilst I am instructing the computer it is perhaps the computer that has final say on the creative outcome.
Although feeling like the technology is dictating to me how my final outcome will look (and be presented re:print technology), in reading what I have said interface direction is perhaps not simply a one way street (yet...) but more a two way interaction.
alice
|
|
|
| |
| I am a Nexis 4-manufactured by the Disney Corporation |
| 07.26.03 (11:42 pm) [edit] |
In response to Lars- I think it has already happened- we are already controlled by "the machine"- the myths of "Human Freedom, God-Like-Ness and Power" are just psychological techniques to keep our bodies quiet and Docile ( Foucault)- a kind of high-tech fencing system.
In the "Bladerunner", The Tyrell Corp is implanting memories into the minds of the replicants in order to help make them obediant. My subconscious is full of false memories- alot of it Disney. Disney is mythic/ bible stories/ Grimm or /Greek/Roman stuff- a consistant moral stance- a message- a way of life- A philosophy if you don't have one yourself (who does?).
Trudge to the milking shed- trudge to the paddock, stand still while you are being drenched. Never kick the farmer. Strive constantly for increased milk fat. Don't be a stupid loser who gets sent to the meat works. It is great to be a cow living on the best farm in the world. Feed out time is my favorite part of the day! What a view!
We are already replicants and have been since we were infected by a virus, "language" many hundreds of thousands of years ago. (according to De Mann there are "aspects of language that are irreducably mechanical"- the Forest Pyle article p126). My guess is that many species of "language", (which are possibly Prions, like Mad Cow Disease) evolved on Earth after arriving from outer space on a meteor. Humans are the only host species. During the last few thousand years the benign species of "language " have quickly been forced out of existence by virulent and malignant species, particularly English. We are slaves to language.
Parasites can take control of the host's mind and modify the host's behavior in a way beneficial to the parasite.
"Often the first host is prey for the second, and so the parasites helps the predators catch their prey. Toxoplasma, a protozoan that starts out in rats and other mammals, makes cats its final host. A rat infected with Toxoplasma is perfectly healthy, but it loses its instinctive fear when it smells a cat. By altering the rat's neurochemistry, Toxoplasma may make its hosts easier targets." http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/d...
Interestingly, untill the advent of photographs and video and now VR- expression was largely limited to language. Music helped. Mathmatics helped (e=mc2). Finally the reign of "language" is being challenged by graphic thought.
Language is never going to describe itself as a parasite (it just did!). A bit like letting Lawyers regulate themselves. Language does not like to be critiqued in any serious, fundamental way.
We are different from our ancient forebears- as different as domesticated dogs are from wolves. Our distant ancestor had vision quests, coming of age initiations and journeys of personal self discovery. Their memories were of real monsters.- saber tooth tigers. (marc)
|
|
|
| |
| Bork - Star Trek |
| 07.24.03 (4:22 am) [edit] |
Hi
todays topic: the interface between humans and computer.
I know that Star Trek is not necessarily a very intelligent series, but in the context of boundaries between Computer and human beings, the Borgs are very interesting.
The Borgs are partly human and partly machine. They have no idendity anymore but think always together. It is like a network of computer but the humans are not user and controller of the network. The network controls the human parts and says, what to do.
The question for me: Can this happen ? Will a network of artificial intelligence start controlling humans ? This would mean: the interface between computer and humans would change the direction. Instead of putting instructions into the computer it would be an interface where the humans get instructions.
As an example:
Last year, two planes crashed. The automatic system advised the pilots in the right way, but the human control tower operator gave a wrong advise. The pilot did what the human said and crashed into another plane.
Therefore the European Union adopted a new law which forces every pilot to follow the automatic system - and not the human adviser.
This means - the computer take over controll ...
What do you think ?
Lars
|
|
|
| |
| the languages of not speaking |
| 07.23.03 (8:15 pm) [edit] |
If film and media are moving toward stories without speach, surely they are just speaking in there own perscribed/created vocabulary, a language with numerous influences and references. an actor glances across a room and with a single look informs us of mood, moment and contxt. what do we look at? body language, expression, environment? cue danger music...
All well documented and repeated elements of the language of film, that has developed over the last 100 years or so. Is it so very different to the written word? It is after all still storytelling.
Woops. late for class... go figure!
T
|
|
|
| |
| talking with pictures |
| 07.23.03 (6:29 pm) [edit] |
|
I talk to myself insessantly (like the madman on the corner in front of the TipTop) but I do it silently. I hate it and strive to stop it. Most forms of meditation try and do only this- stopping the internal dialogue so that we hear our real voice (the small still voice). Before language (talking) there was listening. When talking first arrived, it must have been difficult to do. Now we are shifting to a visual culture. Cinemetographers communicate with us with pictures. More and more as the technology improves, the words become less important. It is easier to convey concepts than ever before (pictures of the Matrix). I wonder if the advent of cellphone/cameras is the part of a trend towards communication that is based more on images and experience (VR) and less and less on words and concepts. I think it is Structuralist (theorists) who say that words only refer to other words. This binary structure that seems so sound when viewed from the inside, but a crock of shit when deconstructed from an outside point of view. I watched both of my parents, who were both professors and very articulate, die (old age). Their mastery of the English language- the books and articles that they had read and discussed- did not help them one iota. They were on their own. Words and ideas and concepts just left them to it- two worn out old bodies and infinity. it was nothing but empty words! no kidding (marc)
|
|
|
| |
| we are living here |
| 07.22.03 (10:21 pm) [edit] |
so what is it like writing on a blog? knowing that anyone else (probably readers, or others on tblog.com) can tune in on our 'conversation' whenever they feel like it...or knowing there are 'lurkers', people in our class who CAN 'speak' but are still choosing to stay in the position of spectator/reader. Is it like the video scenario...what is it like reading your own words?
The ability to be able to contribute to the production as well as the consumption of texts is one of the promises of 'new' media.
What are you thinking?
(caro)
|
|
|
| |
| Emotions |
| 07.21.03 (3:23 pm) [edit] |
Why can the camera make people famous? This is in-light of these "reality tv shows" going on and Marcs referal to us going "weird" if Kelly Ozbourne walked in on our class. For me these shows play with our emotions, they make us think "I want to be like that" or "Who the hell goes about doing that". Would we act the same if one of our class mates were to become a huge superstar suddenly compared to a superstar we hadnt meet and they joined us? I like to watch peoples emotions and how they interact in different situations. It also gives us an opinion on whats happening and what we feel is acceptable. Like in Big Brother - why would we get rid of someone who seems big headed and loud then realise when they were gone "oh this isnt as fun to watch cos these people are more like me and I dont want to see that".
(Ruben)
|
|
|
| |
| mondays movie! |
| 07.20.03 (6:10 pm) [edit] |
hi, I have booked Bladerunner in room 202 (one of the smaller seminar rooms in the library)
monday (today) 3-5...see you there,
c
|
|
|
| |
| rhetoric of the image- |
| 07.20.03 (12:34 am) [edit] |
Barthes says " the type of consciousness the photograph involves is truely unprecedented, since it establishes NOT a consciousness of the "being there" of the thing (which any copy could provoke) but an awareness of its "having been there"".
Public, famous and infamous figures are almost all people that we see the photographs or videos of. They are imbued with a power that is palpable. I camped beside Anton Oliver (the former captain of the All Blacks) in Golden Bay. He was friendly and approachable. It was memorable. I remember details about those days that I would have totally forgotten if the next door neighbor had been "ordinary". Ossie Osbourne's kids, Kelly and ?, are superstars now, because they have been filmed and broadcast. Is it the filming AND the broadcasting that does it? What if we filmed ourselves constantly, but showed the resulting film to nobody except ourselves. Would we be imbued with the magical quality of "having been there"? Would we be transformed? or would we have to be broadcast as well? How many people would have to see us how often? Why is Kelly Osbourne a super star? How did the video camera do that to her. Why would we all go weird if she enrolled in our class and showed up on thursdays at 10? Why and how did watching her image do that to us? marc
|
|
|
| |
| An Act? |
| 07.19.03 (4:48 pm) [edit] |
Why do we tend to play up to the camera? I find it strange how a piece of technology can influence the human mind into a false state, I mean how often would you do something on camera that wasn't yourself in a public place. This is in reaction to Marcs interesting idea of recording a day of his life, like if someone was to watch this tape would they be seeing the real Marc or the actor Marc. Its the same with that big brother show, how could you act your true self knowing theres a recording of your actions going on and everyones watching. If you know the camera is on you it is always in the back of your mind, almost playing with your mind and leading you on to do random things. A very maniputalive tool!
(Ruben)
|
|
|
| |
| video recording of a day of my life |
| 07.19.03 (12:31 am) [edit] |
I was wondering about getting my son to follow me around with a video camera for a day and get a record of my life from the third person prospective. It seems to me that in some ways we have more information about friends and even aquantances from simple observation of body language, tone of voice or facial expression than we have of ourselves. So much of digital culture seems to be about getting out of our corporal selves- but often we don't look back at the body we have left behind. Why do many of us find photographs or movies or tape recording of ourselves so unsettling? I wonder what I look like when I am asleep? I have not the slightest idea.
marc
|
|
|
| |
| Response |
| 07.16.03 (10:55 pm) [edit] |
[image_left]desi402_11517 96118.jpg[/image]
Image adding thing is sorta interesting - we have space for 5 images at any one time but turnover would be a good sign. anybody keen to add there own? a bit of visual blogging...
as for our start to the day... ahhh, that 80s music.
T
|
|
|
| |
| protocols |
| 07.16.03 (6:25 pm) [edit] |
as we can all add and edit to each message, we should make an agreement not to delete or change each others messages, and to always identify yourself at the end of your post *(caro)
also you will note that we all have the ability to change the colours etc of the design of the blog, that id fine, feel fre eto fully customise our environment whenever you want *(caro)
|
|
|
| |
| homework |
| 07.16.03 (6:20 pm) [edit] |
|
it would be really good if everyone in the class can a) reply to the email so we are all friends, and b) try "adding a blog" to our new desi402 blog...you could try a test, but then try writing a thought or reflection about the course so far
|
|
|
| |
|
|
