a trivial, generative, murderous program

Posted by Eric Dymond | Tue Feb 24th 2009 6:15 p.m.

open OUTF,">file.pl";
print OUTF "open OUT , \">new.htm\";\nprint OUT \"<html><body>art is made here</body></html>\"\;";
`perl file.pl`;
close OUTF;
unlink("file.pl");
  • Eric Dymond | Tue Feb 24th 2009 6:43 p.m.
    .
  • A. Andreas | Tue Feb 24th 2009 7:54 p.m.
    open OUTF,">file.pl";
    print OUTF "open OUT , \">new.htm\";\nprint OUT \"<html><body>art is made here</body></html>\"\;";
    `perl file.pl`;
    close OUTF;
    unlink("file.pl");

    <

    I am more into typographical aesthetics or dialectics than into the concepts\
    of programming code.

    >

    <

    For that reason programming code, in whatever language, which is lacking\
    either aesthetics or dialectics, makes me feel indifferent about its merits.

    >

    <

    Either it produces boring output or it fails a raison d'être and is therefore pure waste\
    and a shallow experience of reality.

    >

    Andreas Maria Jacobs

    e:ajaco@xs4all.nl
    w:http://www.nictoglobe.com
  • Eric Dymond | Wed Feb 25th 2009 12:28 a.m.
    well you must be right Andreas Maria Jacobs.
    we shouldn't do this anymore.
  • A. Andreas | Wed Feb 25th 2009 5:15 a.m.
    Hi Eric

    I do not think 'we shouldnt do this anymore'

    I 'd rather think 'we have to do it in a more aesthecical and or dialectical way'

    I do appreciate your efforts.

    Andreas
  • Tim Cowlishaw | Wed Feb 25th 2009 6:11 a.m.
    Andreas,

    I'm a bit curious about how you're using the term 'dialectical' - in what sense can / should a bit of code or artwork be dialectical? assuming you're referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic, and there's not some definition of the word I'm unaware of, of course!

    Cheers,

    Tim
  • Eric Dymond | Wed Feb 25th 2009 12:12 p.m.
    Andreas, just wondering, do you know what the program does when it's run?
    Is the process a metaphor for infanticide?
  • A. Andreas | Wed Feb 25th 2009 4:04 p.m.
    Well Eric

    I'v put the lines in a file called test.pl:

    #!/usr/bin/perl
    open OUTF,">file.pl";
    print OUTF "open OUT , \">new.htm\";\nprint OUT \"<html><body>art is made here</body></html>\"\;";
    `perl file.pl`;
    close OUTF;
    unlink("file.pl");

    than I ran ./test.pl

    and it produced a file (like the code is telling to do) new.htm in which is stated that art is produced in there.
    it also creates and then uncreates an intermediate file called file.pl, which is used as a kind of birthgiving mechanism.

    But , it still does not gives me a sensation that there is something exciting or deep meaning relted going on as the title of your code ("trivial, generative, murderous program") suggests

    Or do you mean to say that that file.pl is commiting suicide after giving birth to new.htm, in that case is should be named parenticide and not infanticide.

    Again correct me if I drawing the wrong conclusions.

    Andreas

    Artist/Software Engineer

    In case I missed something please explain.
    • Eric Dymond | Wed Feb 25th 2009 7:45 p.m.
      actually, it's the intermediate file (file.pl) that creates the new.htm and is then removed by it's parent process, so infanticide it is.
      It's not parricidal.
      and it's trivial.
  • Pall Thayer | Wed Feb 25th 2009 5:37 p.m.
    Trivial murderous programs

    random_killer versus serial_killer

    #!/usr/bin/perl
    # random_killer.pl
    $process_id = int(rand(30000));
    eval{
    `kill $process_id`;
    }
    # end

    #!/usr/bin/perl
    # serial_killer.pl
    foreach(0..30000){
    eval{
    `kill $_`;
    }
    }
    # end
  • Pall Thayer | Wed Feb 25th 2009 6:07 p.m.
    Trivial dangerous program (if anyone is foolish enough to run this, then don't blame me, it's all in the title).

    #!/usr/bin/perl
    # walking_backwards_so_that_i_can_see_the_destruction_in_my_wake.pl
    $path = '';
    while(1){
    `rm -rf $path`;
    $path .= '../';
    }
    # end
  • Tim Cowlishaw | Wed Feb 25th 2009 6:13 p.m.
    <blockquote>
    it produced a file (like the code is telling to do) new.htm in which is stated that art is produced in there.
    it also creates and then uncreates an intermediate file called file.pl, which is used as a kind of birthgiving mechanism.

    But , it still does not gives me a sensation that there is something exciting or deep meaning relted going on as the title of your code ("trivial, generative, murderous program") suggests

    Or do you mean to say that that file.pl is commiting suicide after giving birth to new.htm, in that case is should be named parenticide and not infanticide.

    </blockquote>

    I personally read it as drawing on the history of appropriations and re-imaginings of MTAA's 'Simple Net Art' Diagram:
    http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=%22net%20art%20diagram%22&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi

    Given that the html file is created by that intermediate perl file, which is generated under instruction, it suggested to me that the "Art" is created in the space where the computer executes the instructions given to it by the author, rather than in the author's instructions themselves or in the finished work. I guess that is a sort of dialectic in a sense - Generative art existing in the synthesis of authorial instruction and computational legwork, rather than in the instruction or the finished work.
  • Tim Cowlishaw | Wed Feb 25th 2009 6:14 p.m.
    However, I'll concede that if you're concerned with typographic aesthetics, perl code in particular probably isn't going to be something you'd enjoy :-)
  • Salvatore Iaconesi | Wed Feb 25th 2009 6:44 p.m.
  • A. Andreas | Wed Feb 25th 2009 8:28 p.m.
    these:

    Trivial dangerous program (if anyone is foolish enough to run this, then don't blame me, it's all in the title).

    #!/usr/bin/perl
    # walking\_backwards\_so\_that\_i\_can\_see\_the\_destruction\_in\_my\_wake.pl
    $path = '';
    while(1){
    `rm -rf $path`;
    $path .= '../';
    }
    # end

    antithese:

    ⠠⠞⠗⠊⠧⠊⠁⠇ ⠙⠁⠝⠛⠑⠗⠕⠥⠎ ⠏⠗⠕⠛⠗⠁⠍ (⠊⠋ ⠁⠝⠽⠕⠝⠑ ⠊⠎ ⠋⠕⠕⠇⠊⠎
  • Pall Thayer | Thu Feb 26th 2009 5:07 a.m.
    Andreas, in some ways your version could be said to be more aesthetically pleasing in an abstract way but by making it "unrunnable" you've altered everything about the original in an art-sense. The "runnability" of art-code is half (give or take) of its conceptual foundation.
Your Reply