[Nettime-bold] Re: nettime-l-digest V1 #1054

["Jody Berland" <jody.berland@sympatico.ca>]

I am not sure whether mankind is devoid of shame (important elements are,
certainly) but I worry that everyone that has access to a listserv may be.
Our university sends out a "newsletter" 5 days a week. Little news reports
if someone is cited in the media, encouraging thoughts about the "climate of
opportunity" and buzz about various corporate friendlies who now comprise
all the advisory boards.  If you try to get off of their list, you can't.
If you try to return it to them, you can't.  If you complain to the
"communications" staff they say there is nothing they can do about it.  If
you take it to the academic senate then the university president tells you
to shut up.  If your memory isn't up to date the spam shuts down your
system.  If they are, as they suggest, conducting "research" they have not
asked for permission from their human subjects.  I get nervous when people
use incarceral metaphors for institutions but now I am beginning to
understand why.
By the way, does Spam Arrest work?  maybe I could pay them to shut up my
university.
Jody Berland

Editor, TOPIA: Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies
www.yorku.ca/topia and/or http://www.utpjournals.com/topia/
TOPIA Campaign 500 : Help us reach our goal of 500 subscribers
.

----- Original Message -----
From: "nettime-l-digest" <owner-nettime-l-digest@bbs.thing.net>
To: <nettime-l-digest@bbs.thing.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 11:26 PM
Subject: nettime-l-digest V1 #1054


>
> nettime-l-digest     Thursday, February 13 2003     Volume 01 : Number
1054
>
>
>
> Table of Contents:
>
>     <nettime> Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
>     <nettime> admin note/RFC: 'antispam' services and nettime
>     <nettime> spamfree-full digest [arrest x2, guderian, cramer, hwang,
jett]
>     <nettime> Declaration of Lima, about Internationalization of
Cyberspace (fwd)
>     <nettime> dimensions of data space...
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 23:18:10 -0600
> From: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>
> Subject: <nettime> Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
>
> *Why am I getting spam from Spam Arrest?
> Is mankind devoid of shame?  -- bruces
>
> From: Spam Arrest <info@spamarrest.com>
> Date: Wed Feb 12, 2003  10:55:21 PM US/Central
> To: Bruce Sterling <bruces@well.com>
> Subject: ADV: Enjoy a spam-free inbox
>
> You may remember recently sending an email to a Spam Arrest customer,
> and receiving a response asking you to visit our website and type in
> a word that was shown to you in a picture.
>
>
> It was pretty easy, wasn't it?
>
>
> Did you know that that one simple step stops virtually all spam from
> entering our customers' inboxes?
>
>
> You too can enjoy the benefits of a spam-free inbox.
>
> We are so confident you'll like our product, that we'd like to offer
> you a 30-Day free trial. If you are un-satisfied for any reason, just
> cancel your account before the end of the trial and you'll pay nothing.
>
>
>
> Click here to visit our website and start your trial:
>
> http://spamarrest.com/affl?1980401
>
>
> Spam Arrest
> Take control of your inbox!
>
>
> - ----------------------
>
> You are receiving this email in response to an email you recently
> sent to a Spam Arrest customer.
>
> If you do not wish to receive further promotional emails from
> Spam Arrest, please click the following link:
>
> http://spamarrest.com/affl?1980401/optout/index.jsp
>
> #  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 00:57:02 -0500
> From: "nettime's_janitors" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>
> Subject: <nettime> admin note/RFC: 'antispam' services and nettime
>
> [we drafted this 'RFC' before we learned, from bruce sterling's message,
> that one of the services in question was spamming (some of?) the people
> who emailed its clients (probably via nettime) with what appears to be
> a unique URL. -- cheers, t]
>
>
> lately, a few nettime subscribers have signed up with one of several
> newish spam-blocking services that are generating what could, over time,
> become a problem for mailing lists. what follows is a rough explanation of
> how they work and why the nettime moderators think they're incompatible
> with -- or even antithetical to -- an open mailing list culture. we'd like
> some input on how to deal with them.
>
> the culprit service (which we won't name) works like this:
>
>     (1) an email user subscribes to service and gives the details of
>         his/her email account (login, password, popserver); the user
>         also gets a chance to give the service a 'whitelist' of email
>         addresses s/he wants to receive mail from.
>
>     (2) the service then periodically POPs the person's mail and compares
>         each message to the whitelist.
>
>         (a) if the sender is in the whitelist, the mail is is passed on to
>             the user; or
>
>         (b) if the sender isn't in the whitelist, the service sends an
>             automated response to the sender asking him/her/it to 'click
>             on a link.' the webpage shows an obfuscated image of a short,
>             random text, which the source must type into a field. once
>             the source has done that, the mail gets passed on to the user.
>
> for mailing lists, this approach especially flawed for two reasons. first,
> if the user doesn't include the mailing list *and its admin address*
> ('nettime-l@' and 'nettime@', respectively) in his/her whitelist, the mail
> sent to him/her via the list spawns at least one 'click this link'
response
> (to the sender) and maybe more (to the mailing list and/or its admin
address).
> and a list admin can't simply explain the problem to the user, because the
> admin will get the same response. the only way around it is to 'click on
> the link.'
>
> for a list like nettime, which has almost 3000 people on it, this is a
very
> broken system. moderating a list is quite enough work, but clicking here
> and typing there to route around subscribers' spam-blocking services is a
> chore caused either (a) by a badly designed system, or (b) by a user's
> sloppy configuration of the service.
>
> moreover, if services like this are widely adopted, the result will be
> mayhem. let's say that half of nettimers use them; and only 10% of them
> have misconfigured their settings (which is a reasonable number given the
> many error msgs we already get), then everyone who posts a message to
> nettime will be bombarded with 150 'click this link' messages. this would
> make posting to the list a huge nuisance and, in effect, kill the list.
>
> the nettime mods think this is a Really Bad Thing, and that the best
> solution is to discourage the use of these services. we contacted the
> people who run the culprit service, and they came back with a fairly
> substantive answer pretty quickly -- which is good. but if their business
> grows, they'll probably be less responsive.
>
> the simplest solution would be to trash these spam-blocking responses; but
> a better solution, we think, is to automatically unsubscribe anyone
> subscriber who misconfigures a spam-blocking account. if the person values
> nettime (or any other affected list), then s/he can sort out the problem;
> if not, oh well.
>
> we'd hope that these services would automatically whitelist everyone their
> users send mail to, because that would minimize the coercive aspects of
> these systems automatically. but, ultimately, that's their business. our
> business is keeping nettime as open and efficient as possible.
>
> but rather than impose this policy by fiat, we're interested to hear what
> nettimers have to say, on the list or in private.
>
> thoughts?
>
> the mod squad: andrea, felix, oliver, ted
>
> #  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:17:02 -0500
> From: "nettime's_intruder_alert" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>
> Subject: <nettime> spamfree-full digest [arrest x2, guderian, cramer,
hwang, jett]
>
> ADV: Enjoy a spam-free inbox
>      Spam Arrest <info@spamarrest.com>
>      Spam Arrest <info@spamarrest.com>
> Re: Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
>      Carl Guderian <carlg@vermilion-sands.com>
> Re: <nettime> Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
>      Florian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
> Re: admin note/RFC: 'antispam' services and nettime
>      Benjamin Geer <ben@beroul.uklinux.net>
>      Francis Hwang <sera@fhwang.net>
> Re: Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
>      "N Jett" <njett@hotmail.com>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> From: Spam Arrest <info@spamarrest.com>
> To: Announcer <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>
> Subject: ADV: Enjoy a spam-free inbox
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 03:14:44 -0800
>
> You may remember recently sending an email to a Spam Arrest customer,
>  <...>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> From: Spam Arrest <info@spamarrest.com>
> To: "nettime's_roving_reporter" <nettime@bbs.thing.net>
> Subject: ADV: Enjoy a spam-free inbox
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 03:14:44 -0800
>
> You may remember recently sending an email to a Spam Arrest customer,
>  <...>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 12:01:19 +0100
> From: Carl Guderian <carlg@vermilion-sands.com>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
>
> It's the boiler room, squeezed out of meatspace into cyberspace.
Telemarketers
> used to sell a service to take you of national dial lists, claiming to
have
> the "kill codes." Spammers are one-person boiler rooms, and they pick up
where
> the modern boiler operation, studied in Stevenson's "Boiler Rooms and
Other
> Telephone Scams" (1998) left off.
>
> For all that Extropian prattle over evolving into virtuality, it's the
boiler
> rooms that have truly achieved it.
>
> Carl
>
> Bruce Sterling wrote:
>
> > *Why am I getting spam from Spam Arrest?
> > Is mankind devoid of shame?  -- bruces
>  <...>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:11:24 +0100
> From: Florian Cramer <cantsin@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> admin note/RFC: 'antispam' services and nettime
>
> Am Donnerstag, 13. Februar 2003 um 00:57:02 Uhr (-0500) schrieb
> nettime's_janitors:
>
> > thoughts?
>
> Nettimers looking for a working, non-intrusive spam filter should have a
> serious look at SpamAssassin <http://spamassassin.org/>, a free software
> tool (under the Perl Artistic License) available for Unix-like operating
> systems and, in combination with a local POP3 proxy, for Windows
> (see <http://mcd.perlmonk.org/pop3proxy/>). For MacOS X installation
> instructions, see <http://rhumba.pair.com/ben/docs/sa.html>.
>
> Among network administrators, SpamAssassin is widely considered the only
> working solution against spam. As it is written in Perl, it creates
> high CPU loads though and is a solution for client PCs rather than for
> mail servers themselves.
>
> On Unix-like operating systems, I would recommend using SpamAssassin in
> conjunction with procmail, i.e. filter mailing lists through procmail
> first and only the rest with SpamAssassin, like:
>
> :0fw
> | spamassassin
>
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
> $HOME/Mail/junk
>
> - -F
> - --
> http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~cantsin/homepage/
> http://www.complit.fu-berlin.de/institut/lehrpersonal/cramer.html
> GnuPG/PGP public key ID 3200C7BA, finger cantsin@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> From: Benjamin Geer <ben@beroul.uklinux.net>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> admin note/RFC: 'antispam' services and nettime
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:10:38 +0000
>
> On Thursday 13 February 2003 5:57 am, nettime's_janitors wrote:
> > but a better solution, we think, is to automatically unsubscribe anyone
> > subscriber who misconfigures a spam-blocking account. if the person
values
> > nettime (or any other affected list), then s/he can sort out the
problem;
> > if not, oh well.
>
> As someone who administers a lot of lists, I agree completely.  As the
number
> of subscribers (and lists) per list admin increases, the list admin simply
> cannot scale well enough to sort out everyone's subscription and mail
> delivery issues for them.  I do my best, particularly when a subscriber
> knows there's a problem, and writes to the admin address to ask for help.
In
> general, though, I think the only practical approach is to remind people
to
> heed the advice of RFC 1855 (Netiquette Guidelines) [1] -- 'It is your
> responsibility to learn how the lists work' -- and to unsubscribe them
when
> you can't send them email because their Hotmail inbox is full, or when
their
> 'I'm on vacation' message is spamming everyone who posts to the list, etc.
>
> In practice, someone who cares about receiving mail from nettime will
surely
> notice that they haven't received any in a while, and will either suspect
> that their spam filter is at fault, or at least ask the nettime moderators
> for help.
>
> I'd recommend putting something in the 'welcome to nettime' email, in all
> caps with lots of asterisks around it, asking people to make sure that
mail
> from nettime will get through their spam filter.
>
> You could even have two addresses for writing to the nettime admins: the
> standard one, which would just send an auto-reply containing a nettime FAQ
> (including the info about spam filters), and another, harder-to-find one
for
> people whose question isn't in the FAQ.
>
> Ben
>
> [1] http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
> service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
> around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 07:43:47 -0500
> From: Francis Hwang <sera@fhwang.net>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> admin note/RFC: 'antispam' services and nettime
>
> I'm not sure if this sort of solution will catch on, in the
> long-term. I suppose if you're a casual net user who doesn't often
> get contacted by strangers for legit reasons this is fine. But
> anybody who has any significant online presence is bound to get
> contacted by strangers for legit reasons -- hell, it happens to me at
> least once a week -- and it seems really rude to me to tell them
> "prove to me you're a human before I look at your message." If you're
> really worried about it, do the tried-and-true solution of
> maintaining two email addresses: one for people you know, the other
> for the world-at-large. When you get a real email in your public
> inbox, tell them about the private addresses. Easier than maintaining
> a whitelist, that's for sure ...
>
> On the level of list-maintenance, I'm not sure how much of an
> annoyance this is. These verification emails probably get sent to the
> Reply-To or From address -- which on Nettime as on many other lists,
> should be the original poster, not the entire list. Which is Bruce
> Sterling got the verification email for posting something to Nettime.
> The Nettime folks themselves are probably receiving these emails when
> they send out emails to the list directly, making digests or
> announcements, directly.
>
> Is it even technically possible for these businesses to even
> whitelist a mailing-list? It's possible that their code may not have
> accounted for this circumstance. For non-bulk-email, your code's
> going to look at the Reply-To: or From: headers, since that's where
> the interesting data is. But for mailing lists, the interesting info
> is in the To: field, and they probably haven't bothered to account
> for that. Sloppiness is everywhere.
>
> I don't know if I would advise Nettime to unsubscribe people who use
> these services. That's more unnecessary work for the admins. Instead,
> it might be simply more effective to treat these messages as what
> they are: Another form of spam. You don't attack spam personally, you
> filter it. And you tell all your list subscribers how to filter it.
> (If you're posting to a mailing list, you open yourself up to major
> email-address harvesting anyway.)
>
> This spam, luckily enough, will be much easier to filter than most
> spam. It'll have consistent, non-forged headers. Ignoring it should
> be a piece of cake.
>
> Francis
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> From: "N Jett" <njett@hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> Okay, that does it -- Armageddon is too good for us
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 07:41:12 +0000
>
> Shame has been going out of fashion since at least the Enlightenment; and
> isn't it doubly ironic that their spam has now been shared with all of us
on
> nettime? Rather effective at spreading itself...  :) Not that I'm making
> accusations - I was spammed with that Bush/Iraq as Nigerian Banking Scam
and
> forwarded it along to my coworkers. Strange days have found us.
>
> njett - http://gogobot.blogspot.com
>
> >*Why am I getting spam from Spam Arrest?
> >Is mankind devoid of shame?  -- bruces
>
>  <...>
>
> Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> #  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:16:59 +0100 (CET)
> From: Heiko Recktenwald <uzs106@IBM.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
> Subject: <nettime> Declaration of Lima, about Internationalization of
Cyberspace (fwd)
>
> We had this topic:
>
> >From: GIC <gic@alfa-redi.org>
> >Subject: Declaration of Lima, about Internationalization of Cyberspace
> >
> >Group of Internationalization of Cyberspace
> >http://www.alfa-redi.org/GIC
>
> >Facultad Libre de Derecho de Monterrey
> >Comunidad Alfa-Redi
> >Lima, 2/7/03
>
> >Subject: Declaration of Lima, GIC
(http://www.alfa-redi.org/gic/lima-en.asp)
>
> >Dear Friends,
> >
> >Much time has passed since the First World Congress for Informatics and
Law
> >and the creation of the "Group for the Internationalization of
Cyberspace"
> >(GIC) (http://www.alfa-redi.org/gic). Some international publications
have
> >given us a favorable echo and we have been supported by  various Latin
> >American and European associations.
> >
> >Our first demand, as stated in our Resolution of Quito
> >(http://www.alfa-redi.org/gic/quito.asp), knowingly the convocation of an
> >international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, has
been
> >satisfied with the organization of the World Summit for the Information
> >Society(http://www.itu.int/wsis).
> >
> >But there is still work in regard to our second and main demand: the
> >establishment of an international legal frame for Cyberspace, in order to
> >insure peace, development and the elimination of the digital divide.
> >
> >It seemed that at the beginning our participation in the Summit had been
> >insured by the ITU; but since then, it occurred that the Secretary
General
> >of the ITU did not consider to invite us for PREPCOM 2. Consequently, we
> >have to fight for having our place in the Summit, taking into
consideration
> >that our proposal could be adopted by other organizations with whom we do
> >share the same principles.
> >
> >Being conscience that many associations ought to comply with their own
> >issues, they nevertheless might also take into consideration our proposal
> >that aims to be equilibrated, neutral and complying with the principal
> >demands of the civil society organizations.
> >
> >Consequently, we do invite you to support our project and its proposal to
> >"Internationalize Cyberspace"; to join the Declaration of Lima
> >(http://www.alfa-redi.org/gic/lima-en.asp) and to diffuse it. Together,
we
> >can fight for the same goal: a Free and Open Cyberspace: not so much for
us
> >than for our children. Some say that the future does not belong to us; it
is
> >only rented to us by the next generations. In this, we do believe, and
for
> >this, we do fight.
> >
> >
> >Best regards
> >
> >Dr. James A. Graham
> >Chairman of the Steering Committee
> >GIC
> >
> >For support: mail to gic@alfa-redi.org ; subject: Support GIC . Please
> >indicate your name, charge and organization (and in case, please indicate
if
> >it is a personal or institutional support).
>
>
> - --------------------------------------------------------------
> EURO-LEX info: list object and policy, subscribers, countries,
> subscribe/signoff procedures, list archive, searches, contact.
> Send a mail to listserv@listserv.gmd.de, text = info euro-lex
> - --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> #  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 21:20:59 +0100
> From: Scott deLahunta <sdela@ahk.nl>
> Subject: <nettime> dimensions of data space...
>
> Hello...
>
> Some reflections on a project involving choreographers, animators and
> programmers working with motion capture systems.
>
> You can also link to it online here: http://huizen.dds.nl/~sdela/mcrl/;
the
> page has some small images...
>
> Scott
>
> *******************************************
> *******************************************
>
> THE DIMENSIONS OF DATA SPACE
>
> By Scott deLahunta
>
> 29 January 2002
>
> [due to be published in Spring 2003 in: Anomalie digital_arts #3.
> "Interfaces. Theories & Applications". Paris: Anomos. ed. Emanuele Quinz.
> http://www.anomos.org/]
>
> Introduction
>
>  From 10-14 December 2002, the Monaco Dance Forum hosted the Motion
Capture
> Tech Laboratory "Real Time and Networked: Sharing the Body". [1] The
> overall objective was to engage in an investigation led by artistic
> questions and processes into the use of real time and networked motion
> capture and computer animation systems. [2] The core research team
included
> dance and programming artists who are already working with these systems
> and have complimentary approaches. Two researchers documented the
> laboratory and facilitated reflection on its broader implications through
> interviews and group discussion. A commercial motion capture company
> provided systems and support and took part in all creative aspects of the
> laboratory. The motion capture systems used included two Gypsy
> exoskeletons, the Polhemus Startracker and the Motion Captor optical
> system. [3] The software was off the shelf programmes (e.g. Kaydara
> Filmbox) and customised code.
>
> The research team comprised, in alphabetical order, Tania Barr (FR), Scott
> deLahunta (NL), Nik Haffner (DE), Maurice Kadaoui (FR), Bernd Lintermann
> (DE), John McCormick (AU), Thomas McManus (DE), Armando Menicacci (FR) and
> Emanuele Quinz (FR). Emmanuel Berriet (FR) and Mark Coniglio (USA)
> participated on a part-time basis. See Appendix for related URLs.
>
> The team arrived on Sunday, 8 December to set up the spaces and continued
> this work on Monday [4]. Beginning Tuesday, the research laboratory was in
> operation from 10.00 to 18.00 hours daily. The space was generally open
for
> those who wished to observe, and there was a formal open visiting period
at
> the end of the day when the research team was available to provide
> demonstrations and explanations. The research laboratory concluded with a
> final fifty-minute presentation at 16.00 on Saturday 14 December to an
> audience of approximately sixty. This was followed by some further
> discussion and the formal close of the lab.
>
> Personal Reflections:
>
> The following is selection of three separate but related lines of
thinking,
> inspired and progressed by the experience of the lab. The first attempts a
> description of motion capture systems in terms that are more cultural than
> technical. The second draws on the experience to make some observations on
> cross-disciplinary creative research processes. The third line of thinking
> seeks to make some relationships that might contribute to our
understanding
> of working within computation systems. I have opted for the following
> self-imposed interrogative format as the best way to convey these lines of
> thinking that are currently incomplete and, like the research laboratory
> itself, exploratory.
>
> Q & R #1:
>
> Q: Why aren't you going to write about the technical systems? What if your
> readers don't understand what motion capture is?
>
> R: I might have felt compelled to do this a few years ago, but I sense
> general knowledge of these systems amongst dance artists in particular has
> increased. There has also been growth in computing science and engineering
> research in the field of sampling, synthesizing and modelling motion in
> three dimensions. In addition, a number of small commercial initiatives
(in
> different countries) seeking niche markets for customised motion capture
> solutions have emerged. The evidence for all of this seems easily
available
> on-line, and I would like to encourage everyone to look on the Internet so
> that they see the contexts within which this knowledge is being developed.
>
> What seems missing from the 90,000 plus pages that come up if you search
on
> "motion capture" is any broad cultural analysis of this field. You do find
> some histories of the development of the technologies, but little else
> besides information related directly to building functional systems. I am
> speculating that this is partially because motion capture systems exist in
> a state of extreme instrumentality relative to the uses for which they are
> built. In other words, they are so tightly woven as systems to the
purposes
> of either animation or motion analysis; that they seem to be pure
> instruments or tools. Almost no one involved in the creation and use of
> motion capture systems deviates from these trajectories of purpose. If the
> system is not used "properly" it generates "useless" materials, and in the
> context of either motion analysis or animation this deviation away from
> utility would just be too costly in terms of both time and money. This
> means that it can be very difficult for artists to intervene in these
> systems somehow; to hack into them, twist, challenge and allow for or
cause
> accidental forms to arise from them.
>
> Q: Why, are you so concerned about motion capture systems being so purely
> instrumental? How would you apply this thinking to the work in the motion
> capture lab?
>
> R: One of the things at issue here is we need discourses that make
> distinctions between artistic, commercial and scientific research. They
are
> not the same processes, and these days when we are being encouraged to
> collaborate across these sectors more often it is all the more important
to
> develop an understanding of these differences. During the research
> laboratory in Monaco in more than one instance accidental data was being
> explored through, for example, the conscious occlusion of some of the
> reflectors for the optical system and the proposal to use an alternative
> calibration for the Gypsy. Thomas tried to 'outrun' the optical motion
> capture system one day to see if it could keep up with very fast movement.
> These are not trivial strategies; they underpin the types of investigatory
> processes that, in my opinion, we need to open space for in relation to
> motion capture systems. These are the conditions from which unexpected
> creative forms are going to emerge, and we were lucky to have the
> opportunity to explore this in the research lab.
>
> Q & R #2:
>
> Q: You have referred to the conditions of the laboratory as being very
> generative and stimulating. How would you describe this?
>
> R: Well, it's crucial to remember that we were only together for a week
and
> that as a group we were relatively new to each other. We needed to set up
a
> good process for the exchange of ideas related to artistic practices. So,
> to begin with we did not pursue any single line of enquiry and had group
> discussions whenever they were necessary. These discussions tended not to
> determine work processes as much as respond to and guide them. This is
> important; it was conducive to an atmosphere of 'doing' and playfulness,
> trial and error, and a reliance on intuition. There were also many things
> happening simultaneously. So, the lab was more like a brainstorming
session
> than following a predetermined set of designed or developmental
procedures.
> This type of process stands in contrast to the instrumentality of these
> motion capture systems that I already mentioned.
>
> It is important to note that the conditions included a primarily implicit
> commitment to open processes.  We all know that the idea of an open
> (knowledge development) process has implications for intellectual property
> issues, in particular in the commercial and scientific marketplace, but we
> maintained this tacit contract between us to be as non-proprietary as
> possible. And this was not only amongst us, but also with all those who
> came to observe. It might be wise to underpin any future stages of
research
> and development work by being more explicit on this topic; but at such a
> preliminary/ exploratory stage it is, in my opinion, okay and maybe even
> better to operate in good faith.
>
> Q: Didn't you work under the understanding that you didn't have to have an
> "end product"?
>
> R: Yes, it was made clear at the start that we were not aiming for any
> particular "end product". This didn't mean we would have nothing to show
as
> the results of our research, we had plenty of things to show and discuss
> both during and at the end; but it helped to establish the ground from
> which a variety of ideas could be explored with an eye to the range of
> possible "end products"; for example; various art works, software
> solutions, compositional strategies, etc.
>
> Q: Isn't deferral the danger of such an approach? It seems you could just
> end up with a series of endless demonstrations of things that have
> potential but are not finished.
>
> R: You are right to mention this. Heidi Gilpin and Lorne Falk in their
1995
> article "Demo Aesthetics" have written an interesting critical piece on
the
> implications of the emphasis on description and demonstration that seems
to
> permeate a lot of artworks using new technologies. [5] They write about an
> aesthetics that "invokes a work of representation that is unfinished" or
> that is in a state of endless reformulation. They situate this in the
> current techno-cultural climate as a tendency to reconfigure the prototype
> as a product, which makes it commodifiable as such. So, it is something to
> be aware of.
>
> What is required in the context of experimentation in the performing arts
> field, in my opinion, is something in between this pressure on the one
side
> to prove how technologies either succeed or fail in the context of the
> stage performance (as an end product) and on the other side the value of
> working processes that develop a clear understanding of the terms and
> context of artistic research in relation to other practices that are
> foregrounding innovation. Both situations can end up either generating or
> squashing new forms of expression and ways of thinking; so it's not an
> either/ or situation. But one thing is abundantly clear to me after
> observing many projects involving complicated digital technologies and
live
> performance making. They really benefit from a generous amount of
> development time and being able to proceed in clear stages or phases. Each
> phase contains an evaluation of its own outcomes and this helps to
> determine the direction(s) for the next, sort of a recursive process you
> might say. With this in mind, I would characterize our motion capture lab
> in Monaco as a "preliminary research phase" that resulted in successfully
> establishing effective social relations and working vocabularies from
which
> to depart.
>
> Q & R #3:
>
> Q: Why did you title this report "dimensions of data space"?
>
> R: One of the major lines of inquiry during the lab was the question of
> "what are the properties of these motion capture systems?" In seeking to
> learn more about these properties we decided to spend as much time as
> possible just being in the systems  so that we had a constant physical
> experience of the dimensions of real space in relation to the dimensions
of
> the data space. But how can we think about the dimensions of data space?
> One place to start is the concept of 'calibration'. Motion capture is
> essentially a measuring instrument and like all measuring instruments it
> requires calibration to align its internal units to the real world units.
> Calibration manifests a level of description within which other
> descriptions have meaning, and all motion capture systems, optical,
> magnetic and exoskeletons involve different procedures for it. For
> instance, calibration of the gypsy aligns the exoskeleton with the body
> that wears it; so the dimensions of data space lie very close to the
mover.
> Without this level of description the system has no context to recognise
> the data being generated by the mover.
>
> I think this is one of the keys to developing a better understanding of
the
> relation between physical and computation spaces, the relation between
real
> bodies and data bodies if you will. It is partly down to the organisation
> of levels of description that can be understood by the mover and the
> information system and can travel in both directions in and out. [6] Dance
> practitioners in general have difficulty with imagining the dimensions of
> data space in any tangible and therefore potentially creative way. What
> underlies this is the lack of an adequate set of formalisms for describing
> gesture and movement in terms that not only the system can interpret, but
> are equally accessible to choreographers. Motion capture is an interesting
> technology, but uses descriptions of motion based in mathematics and
> invented by computer scientists and engineers, physicists, bio-mechanists
> and human figure animators. There is probably no need to invent new
> mathematical descriptions based on the needs of choreographers; but to use
> what exists in new and innovative combinations that can be integrated with
> the working processes of dance makers. This is what I meant by levels of
> description that can travel in both directions in and out of the system.
>
> This is not so much a matter of teaching choreographers to be
> mathematicians, but in developing an understanding of a range of
> co-meaningful representations, classifications, algorithms, notations and
> codes. My feeling, affirmed by the experience of the research lab and by
> some promising initiatives taking place, is that we are on the cusp is
> seeing a shift in this area. [7] If we can encourage and support growing
> awareness and understanding of the properties of motion capture and other
> information systems amongst choreographers and dancers this should
> stimulate imaginations and may quicken the emergence of these generative
> shared descriptions.
>
> END/ END/ END/ END/ END
>
> APPENDIX
>
> Notes:
>
> [1] Taking place for the second time (1st edition 2000) at the Grimaldi
> Forum in Monaco, the Monaco Dance Forum 2002 was a five-day international
> gathering comprising a diverse range of events including performances,
> exhibitions, symposia, multimedia installations, showcases and the
> International Dance Screen competition. http://www.mddf.com
>
> [2] Since the early to mid 1990s, dancers, choreographers, multimedia
> artists and software programmers have been collaborating in exploring the
> uses of motion capture technologies in artistic projects; establishing
> precedents for the exchange of creative ideas and practice from which
> current and future arts researchers can depart. For some historical
> information and references to some of these artworks; please refer to:
> "Choreographing in Bits and Bytes", January 2000
> http://www.daimi.au.dk/~sdela/bolzano/. (Also published in La scena
> digitale. A. Menicacc and E. Quinz, eds. Venezia Marsilio, 2001) and
> "Virtual Dance: a report on the Riverbed residency"
> http://www.dartington.ac.uk/staff/sdelahunta/uci/rivrep.html (University
of
> California, Irvine, May 2001). To read about a similar project that took
> place in held in Athens May 2001 see the TRANSDANCE report.
> http://huizen.dds.nl/~sdela/transdance/report/. In addition, dance
> education institutions have begun to invest in experimentation with motion
> capture systems, e.g. the Environments Lab at Ohio State University
> http://www.dance.ohio-state.edu/workshops/mocap.html.
>
> [3] URLs for these systems include: Metamotion (Gypsy)
> http://www.metamotion.com; STT (Motion Captor)
> http://www.simtechniques.com; Polhemus (Startracker)
> http://www.polhemus.com/; Also see Animazoo sites for sales/ services:
> http://www.animazoo-europe.com and http://www.animazoo.com/.
>
> [4] The list below provides a general description of the technical
> requirements for the laboratory.
>
> 1.      Sufficient space and type of floor for movement work.
> 2. Tool Kit: screwdrivers, pliers, gaffer tape, etc.
> 3. Adaptors (various), routers, hubs, splitters, etc.
> 4. Cables (video, ethernet and power)
> 5. Tables, Stands, Chairs, etc.
> 6. Broadband Internet connection
> 7. Lighting system (simple but controllable)
> 8. Sound system to include wireless microphones, amplifiers, speakers,
etc.
> 9. Blank recording media (dvd, cd rom, dv tape, etc.)
> 10. PCs and Macs (portables and desktops/ workstations and servers) with
> sufficient processor speed, RAM, graphics cards, hard disk space, i/o
> ports, cd and dvd burners, etc.
> 11. Software (2-d and 3-d computer graphic software, audio/ video editing,
> etc.)
> 12. Digital cameras (still and video) and tripods
> 13. Data projectors and screens.
> 14. Wireless devices: transmitters/ receivers, etc.
> 15. 3-D Motion Capture Systems (optical, magnetic and exoskeleton)
> 16. Misc. input/ control devices, e.g. midi-keyboard/ slider; data glove,
> joystick, etc.
>
> [5] Lorne Falk and Heidi Gilpin. Demo Aethetics. Convergence: the journal
> of research into new media technologies. 1:2, Autumn 1995. pp. 127-139.
>
> [6] For a relevant discussion on "descriptions of culture" in relation to
> digitisation see: Garcia, David, et al. Content Integrated Research in
> Creative User Systems. Executive Summary of the Third Annual Report for
the
> period December 2000 - September 2001. ESPRIT Working Group 29549.
> http://www.circusweb.org/
>
> [7] For some of these initiatives see "Motion-e" at the Institute for
> Studies in the Arts, Arizona State University
> (http://isa.asu.edu/projects_motione.html) and "3d-traces: an interface
for
> choreographers project" being developed by partners in the UK, Germany,
> France, Australia and Netherlands (http://huizen.dds.nl/~sdela/3dt).
>
> Related URLs:
>
> Tania Barr and Maurice Kadaoui. Directors and owners of Animazoo Europe
> based in France. http://www.animazoo-europe.com, http://www.animazoo.com,
> http://www.metamotion.com
>
> Mark Coniglio. New York City based composer, programmer and performance
> maker. Co-director of Troika Ranch. http://www.troikaranch.org,
> http://www.troikatronix.com
>
> Scott deLahunta. Researcher (Dartington College of Arts, UK) and Writer
> based in Netherlands. http://huizen.dds.nl/~sdela
>
> Nik Haffner and Thomas McManus. Former dancers with Ballet Frankfurt; now
> independent dancers and choreographers and both artists in residence at
> ZKM, Karlsruhe, DE. They are also members of the performance group
"commerce".
>
> Bernd Lintermann. Artist programmer currently artist and scientist in
> residence at ZKM, Karlsruhe, DE. http://i31www.ira.uka.de/~linter/
>
> Mâa (Emmanuel Berriet). Software explorer and president of La Graine/ The
> Seed. http://www.lagraine.com
>
> John McCormick. Co-artistic director of "Company in Space" and artist in
> residence at RMITs interactive information institute.
> http://www.companyinspace.com/
>
> Armando Menicacci and Emanuele Quinz. lecturers, writers/ editors,
> researchers both working at the Paris 8 University Dance Department and
> with Anomos. http://www.anomos.org
>
> Acknowledgements:
>
> We would like to thank the Monaco Dance Forum in particular Phillipe
> Baudelot, producer of the multimedia projects, and the technical support
> team lead by Nick van der Heyden.
>
>
> #  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of nettime-l-digest V1 #1054
> ********************************
>

_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold