Morlock Elloi on Wed, 19 May 2010 06:49:17 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> The Return of DRM

I got few private cheers, but you are correct - any real discourse is gone from nettime. Few polite proclamations, news items from newager/treehugger/antiglobalist/neocommunist arenas, and that's it. Everything is so polite and acceptable.


Now that I got that off my chest ...

> right. all national TV stations are well guarded; but still, some of
> us are working in those structures of control!  most probably because
> of their skills are becoming crucial to the task, rather than because
> of some long term social engineering we would be playing...

"working in those structures of control" == "being those structures of control"

Do not underestimate the ability of the system to subvert. I think that, analogous to my prposition that technology caught up with behaviour, that systems also caught up with individuals. As units, we are pretty much same as we were thousands of years ago. You only have your lifetime to upgrade yourself. Societal systems evolve slower, but they have limitless mermories, or the state in automata theory. It is only question of time when will the slowly evolving system with continuous memory overtake human in terms of outsmarting each other. Maybe we are not there yet, but we're close. It's not AI that will create dystopia. It's the society itself once it matures enough.

> now it is quite naive of you to say that: ignoring the power of
> asymmetrical warfare in contrast to the enthropy pulling out of
> unidirectional technical advancements.

Can you give me *one* example of effective asymmetrical warfare in socio-cultural arena? I don't see anything that even slowed down the invasion of consummerism and liberal capitalism. Don't get me wrong, I am not labelling either as bad or good. Just effective and without competition.

> contrary to popular perception these days, we are not in such a "bad
> historical moment" for digital cultures: most post-modern critics drop

I can't begin to understand what would 'digital culture' mean. If you refer to the current prevailing implementations of communication technology, does it make 19th century a 'cellulose culture'? What do have bit carriers to do with culture designations? Why would that attribute be important?

> Forming armies of mechanical turks is just a desperate preemptive
> attack driven by the rusty corporate juggernaut before the real battle
> starts: while they've played all their cards, we have prepared a
> little but diverse and effective arsenal, which still has to enter
> play.

Have you seen what happens when Indiana Jones meets ninja with knifes?

> do we really need all that?  maybe when we talk about "digitally
> autonomous networks" we speak about two different notions of
> "digital". a piece of paper with an address and a meeting time can be
> even more digital than a twit - and less traceable.

OK, so let's imagine a network of highly motivated conspirators; let's imagine that they have opaque communications channels; let's imagine that they have years to prepare.

What are they preparing for? What is the output? We are assuming here that they will influence someone outside the group (unlike being on nettime.) Is it purely informational, like they will tell the world something? Or is it something else, physical? Secret communications do not help when you are stashing something more than ideas.

You do need technology, otherwise you're stuck with cargo cult rebellions: if we throw bricks here, then torch some cars there, then vote a bit, it will happen!

No it won't. 

> of course! I'm totally into that, living life as an hobby! :)

Professionals can do it cheaper and in less time.


#  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:
#  archive: contact: