>>yes but you will get stcuk with that have rotten apple on the back of the
>>powerbook.
>>which glows and glows and glows and rots my eyes out in performance.

kafka smiles a smile knowingly.

>Gaffers tape. :-)
>
> .thomas

thomas - simply.unconscious

nn - the body likex 2 rest. the mind likex 2 sleep. so you see communism and kapitalism ...

>> inside of the castle NN
>
>hello, are you looking for a land surveyor.

mmmda

the author of `inside of the castle NN` [inside the castle NN every brand is entitled NN -
something to do with communism ...

so ... the author of `inside of the castle NN`
has an excellent memory for the future.

en fakt one did lokate 2 castles. the 01 other
couldnt be bothered 2 - 2 appear 2 at times suffices + is much more affordable (these things happen

nn

castles - http://www.google.com/search?q=%22zaha+hadid%22

http://www.wormweb.nl/agenda/index.aaa?id2838

http://www.mpg.de/news02/news0202.htm

>discontiguous discourse.

Do you cook +?

>Would this be perhaps to discuss enlisting my efforts in the
>maintenance

x:change of fluids +?

>of a

...., once upon time humans could not conceive of the idea of an universe... and then

I am the utterance of my scream.
What is [ ] ?

Humans have achieved higher order consciousness - being conscious of being conscious.

It isn't sufficient for me. I want every thing.

each universe is constructed of 2 universes.

1 2 3 4 5 6
/ / / / / /
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

each universe is constructed of 2 universes.

one may continue splitting any given universe indefinitely
thus obtaining one infinite number of components in
any bit of matter

freedom is gained from the fact that not any size scale is intrinsically
more basik or important or complex than any other size scale.

one often is pressured into feeling that the concerns of
the majority are more significant than one's own immediate personal concerns.
this is based on the fallacious assumption that select sizes are in one absolute sense
larger than others. it is this assumption which the circular scale undermines.

NN - firmness _and delight

John Hopkins <jhopkins@uiah.fi>

[m! bra!n uantz m! 2 t!pe tzo !t kan zm!le at !tz zelv

>back to its beginnings in 1997 - 2000 at
>many relevant (and
>irrelevant!) topics were threaded, and even nn / god-emil was there
>in other configurations (in a more youthful and
>aggressive/aggrandized form) ;-|

WRETCH!!!!

>back to its beginnings in 1997 - 2000 at

nn hadnt yet understood that most humans are ugly [particularly in the west]
and it is because they sell love for happiness.

-
-
-

/_/
/
/ i should like to be a human plant
/ __
__/
i will shed leaves in the shade
\_ because i like stepping on bugs

*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--
Netochka Nezvanova nezvanova@eusocial.com
http://www.eusocial.com

http://www.ggttctttat.com/!
n r . 5 !!! http://steim.nl/leaves/petalz
*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- --*--*--*--*--*--*--

the sum of all sub-event probabilities is greater than one

In a message dated 6/9/2002 10:32:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
muserna@muserna.org writes:

> > the sum of all sub-event probabilities is greater than one
> >
> >
>
> Yikes!#@#&#, does that mean I'm gonna die soon?

Hell if I know what it means, it's Bayesian probability, but I know it's a
smart-people thing, so therefore I love it like a rabbit's foot with the
blood still on.

Relates to Godel too, liebesteorie. It means G2K is riding high on the River
Euphrates I think.

Though you may find, from time to time, complication,

Max Herman
http://www.bavc.org/html/services/index.html

++

If anyone needs to read this, the message will find you, make sure it
gets read and into the head where ever it's supposed to go. If it
sounds stupid, just trash it, it was never going to help you. Call
it either way.

Here's a trick for you to try: Write down a plan (no typing) on a
slip of paper. The more explicit, the better. (even a budget and
schedule help) Store the paper in a box/container that has special
significance to you (maybe a gift). Put the box (alternatively a
locket, or container you wear) somewhere where you look/feel
constantly. At least several hours a day. Spirits will see it and
help you.

No matter how impossible you think your situation is, whatever reason
makes you think it impossibly remote, don't worry. The goal will
find YOU. But only if you are willing to try ANYTHING wether it
makes sense or not for the results to stick.

judson

http://judson.judson.net

>p.s. one more: basically we put the "country name" the
>work was produced...

biensur - nato.0+55 was lifed in _ nSk state

mais ___... i am the future prime minister of

amicalement. nn

-
-
-

/_/
/
/ i should like to be a human plant
/ __
__/
i will shed leaves in the shade
\_ because i like stepping on bugs

*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--
Netochka Nezvanova nezvanova@eusocial.com
http://www.eusocial.com

http://www.ggttctttat.com/!
n r . 5 !!! http://steim.nl/leaves/petalz
*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- --*--*--*--*--*--*--

>At 3:25 PM -0400 19.6.02, Curt Cloninger wrote:
>>If I spraypaint "Nike exploits" on a subway wall, I am subverting
>>the company from without.
>>
>>If I trick Nike into saying "Nike exploits" in their own ad
>>campaigns, if I trick them into using their own marketing money to
>>distribute this slogan, if I trick them into thinking that they
>>are promoting their own brand when in fact they are undermining it
>>-- I am subverting the company from within.
>
>This is what I call transgression --subversion from within the
>(mythical) structures of power.

Now, getting Nike to do an add campaign featuring nothing but
marmalade. That's real transgression if you ask me.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PLASMA STUDII
http://plasmastudii.org
223 E 10th Street
PMB 130
New York, NY 10003

I have a complaint: That ALL complaints are simply the complainers'*
rigid adherence to one perspective, an inability to adopt contrary
views. If you see this complaint as hypocritical, than perhaps there
is also lack of perspective on the part of the reader. If you do not
see the hypocrisy, there is every reason to complain about folks who
complain about folks who refuse to acknowledge paradox.

I have a Caesar salad: That ALL Caesar salads are simply the chefs'*
rigid adherence to a one menu, an inability to work beyond one page
in one cook book. If you are served romaine lettuce, than perhaps
there is also lack of perspective in placing the order. If you are
not served romaine lettuce, there is every reason to complain that
you got someone else's lunch.

I have a nice day sitting outside: That ALL nice days are simply my*
inability to stay in on a cool, sunny day and get work done, an
inability to see my monitor outside when there is so much sun. If
you see that being outside is nice, how are you doing reading this?
If you don't however, try reading a book.

I have engine trouble: That ALL mechanical difficulties (no matter
how metaphorical) are simply results of the owners'* rigid faith in
their investments, an inability of machines to speak in plain English
when they have a message to relay. If you can't interpret the
message, why do you have the machine? If you can, why does it keep
breaking down?

I have these words: "all", "interchangeable" and "banana peel", an
inability of the author*/reader* to substitute one complete thought
for another without creating. If you see meaning, are the component
parts arbitrary? If you don't, are the component parts just
meaningless to begin with?

* all these words mean essentially the same thing: a person who is
dissatisfied with the current state in some way, and makes an effort
to change some element of that state. Though often with no ultimate
change or improvement. They'll be doing it again next week.

complainers keep on complaining
owners keep on buying
salad spinners keep on turnin (yah yah yah)
never reach the Higher Ground

(that verse might have gotten nixed by Stevie Wonder in the studio)

judson

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PLASMA STUDII
http://plasmastudii.org
223 E 10th Street
PMB 130
New York, NY 10003

>Hi Netochka:

i know you not. address me in a beautiful + respectful manner
http://www.m9ndfukc.org/data/noisz/immune.play[tm(just)].mp3

>Friday, June 21 was the longest day of the year for those of us who live
>in the Northern Hemisphere.

it is nice and sunny. you look well. how is your offspring.

>It was also the day we launched the newly
>renovated Rhizome.org web site: http://rhizome.org.
>
>
>Woo hoo!

jankee cucu

>Check it out, and if you like what you see, please consider making an
>online gift at http://rhizome.org/support today.

today is present

>Your donation will help
>fund improvements in the coming weeks.

coming is future

>Rhizome.org has always been a community-driven organization. Now more

kap!tal!zm: neu + !mprovd fasc!zm
komun!t!: neu + !mprovd kap!tal!zm

>Now more
>*a new color scheme

http://www.m9ndfukc.org/data/noisz/half.azleep.mp3

>(Here a part from Amy Wohl's newsletter

very passionate

>that, in part,

in deed

>deals with the
>cultural aspects of
>mobile/cell

cell

>phones

bodies

>and that Sadie Plant also dealt with
>in her Motorola study. Please note how much USA mobile phone discourse
>lacks behind places like Europe, Africa and Asia. Mobile has been a killer
>app for years outside of the USA. But there is hope. Apparently after 911
>everyone has got to have a cell phone in the States, including the
>visionary class or what's left of it. Geert)

amusant.

[as every 01 has 01 body]

nn - delicious solitude

-
-
-

/_/
/
/ i should like to be a human plant
/ __
__/
i will shed leaves in the shade
\_ because i like stepping on bugs

*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--
Netochka Nezvanova nezvanova@eusocial.com
http://www.eusocial.com

http://www.ggttctttat.com/!
n r . 5 !!! http://steim.nl/leaves/petalz
*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- --*--*--*--*--*--*--

http://www.artmargins.com/content/feature/schultz.html

Subj: <nettime> Tactical media?
Date: 7/9/2002 2:37:57 AM Central Daylight Time
From: <A HREF="mailto:keenan@bard.edu">keenan@bard.edu</A>
To: <A HREF="mailto:nettime-l@bbs.thing.net">nettime-l@bbs.thing.net</A>
Sent from the Internet (Details)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41297-2002Jul8.html

Copyright 2002 The Washington Post Company

Banned Falun Gong Movement Jammed Chinese Satellite Signal
By Philip P. Pan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, July 9, 2002; Page A18

BEIJING, July 8 -- The banned Falun Gong spiritual movement jammed one of
China's main television satellites for eight days and briefly beamed a
video into millions of homes during last month's World Cup soccer finals,
the government said today.

The hijacking of the government's Sinosat-1 satellite disrupted TV
transmissions from June 23 to 30 and scratched plans for a live broadcast
of a speech by President Jiang Zemin. It was the latest act of defiance by
a group that has survived a three-year campaign of repression and the most
sophisticated challenge so far to the Communist Party's control of the
media.

Chinese officials said Falun Gong members began bombarding the satellite
with illegal signals shortly after 7 p.m. on June 23, interrupting
transmission of nine national channels and 10 provincial stations to rural
areas without access to regular TV broadcasts. Television screens went
blank for several minutes, then began playing a Falun Gong video with
images of followers meditating in a stadium and then a plaza. Officials
said the video was cut off after only 20 seconds, replaced by a blank
screen again.

Chinese officials declined to say how many people were affected, but
Sinosat-1 is central to a project launched in 1998 to expand TV access to
the nation's most remote regions. More than 70 million people in 100,000
villages rely on it, according to the government.

The government said frequent interference with its broadcasts continued
until June 30, but offered no other details. A Hong Kong-based human
rights group reported that Falun Gong managed to transmit its material
into Chinese homes at least one more time, on June 25, with viewers in
some parts of China seeing 15 minutes of its propaganda.

Falun Gong members have interrupted Chinese broadcasts before, hacking
into cable systems in several cities this year. But taking over a
satellite signal is much more complicated.

Countries have jammed satellite transmissions for political reasons, but
it is unusual for an independent group to do so, and rare if not
unprecedented for anyone to hijack a satellite signal, said Roger Smith,
an official with the Geneva-based international organization that
regulates satellite communications.

"This is extremely despicable and represents yet another crime committed
by the Falun Gong cult organization," said Liu Lihua, a top broadcast
official in the Ministry of Information Industry. "We call on the
international community to jointly condemn this mean act."

Liu said the government had evidence implicating "overseas-based Falun
Gong cult organizations manipulated and directed by Li Hongzhi," the
leader of the Buddhist-like sect who lives in New York. But Liu declined
to present the evidence and acknowledged the government was still trying
to trace the source of the signals.

Levi Browde, a Falun Gong spokesman, denied Li organized the satellite
hijacking, and described it as a grass-roots attempt to fight government
propaganda. "The state-run media is one of the strongest weapons the
government uses to persecute people and incite hatred," he said. "These
people are trying to get the truth out."

Christian Lyngemark, who runs a clearinghouse for technical data on
satellite channels, said the Falun Gong members appeared to have
overpowered the government's signal with their own, which would require a
large satellite dish and expensive equipment.

He said they must have been transmitting from within China or one of its
neighbors to reach Sinosat-1, possibly with a mobile apparatus to make it
more difficult to track them down. As they moved farther from China, he
said, they would need larger satellite dishes and more powerful equipment.

=============================================================================

# 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

>
Also It just hit me what this is partially about - just days after Sept. 11 I flew to Venezuela and installed a version of the textwall (milkmilklemonade.net) for a conference.

I wrote Matt Mirapaul an email - stating that this was an important work at this time - to give a voice to people - and it being installed in another country made it even more special = Less biassed opinion. I wanted some press on this. I felt like a messenger from the inceneration zone (NYC / WTC) - like I had escaped from the US to build this temporary forum for insight into what had happened or was happening. It took alot for me to get on the plane and do this.

Well I never heard much back from Mirapaul - and I guess
some of the old art practices are still in place... an artist can't go through the press directly - they must be fed through a credible source first (?).. or possibly given a story-line so blatantly obvious - it's easy to expand on and write about.

I didn't post it to rhizome (I guess I didn't know the 'rules ..)... so only the people that participated and spoke of Sept. 11, War, God etc. - knew about it.

Here is an excerpt of some of the dialogue from Caracas, Venezuela on Sept. 28, 2001.

i am tires of the people that have god
at their side.////=.........we share the same space, you and
me....////=chaves payaso triste////=For get me not////=SO YOU THINK WE
NEED THE DEVIL?////=////=WHAT IS WRONG WITH GOD? ////=si no hay trabajo,
me quedo con la salsa y la playa!////=////=////=So is Bush////=I am tired
of the violence, we need non-selfish peace, not ignorance...////=It is not
God

<html>
<div align="center">&quot;
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y" eudora="autourl">www.google.com/search?q=lo_y</a>
&quot;<br><br>
<br><br>
<img src="cid:5.1.0.14.0.20020713224813.00ac0ec0@logosfoundation.org.0" width79 height40 alt="9a2a45.jpg"><br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
( &quot; <a href="http://www.netartcertificationoffice.net/stamps.htm" eudora="autourl">http://www.netartcertificationoffice.net/stamps.htm</a> &quot; )<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
</div>
------------------------------------------------------------<br>
--------------lo--------------------------------------------<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; -<br>
-----------------------y------------------------------------<br>
------------------------------------------------------------ <br>
-------------PTRz: <br>
<a href="http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm" eudora="autourl">http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm</a><br>
<a href="http://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html" eudora="autourl">http://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html</a><br>
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y" eudora="autourl">http://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y</a><br>
------------------------------------------------------------ <br>
------------------------------------------------------------ <br>
</html>

Subj: <nettime> Rejecting Prada is about art, not design
Date: 7/14/2002 8:20:19 AM Central Daylight Time
From: <A HREF="mailto:calin@euronet.nl">calin@euronet.nl</A>
To: <A HREF="mailto:nettime-l@bbs.thing.net">nettime-l@bbs.thing.net</A>
Sent from the Internet (Details)

I recently heard a journalist say: "we are -- by definition -- AGAINST".
I think that this type of statement applies to art as well.

Therefore whenever art was confined in narcissistic attitudes of self-
contemplation (lately in the 80s), it has been necessary to act AGAINST that;

and looking over to what was appealing to the masses -- design products,
advertisement, club culture -- packaging in a word, was thought to be a
solution.

Now, when every event of any social surface is closing with a VJ/DJ party,
and
when art events are quite a lot about lounging, fashion parades and food
catering -- it is time to be AGAINST, de nouveau.

The ideological radicalism claimed by those consumer-disguised events is not
enough to make them stay, precisely because this type of critique didn't
manage
to do much more than blurr further the lines between free creativity and
commercially enrolled promotion. Even if just for clearing the air, art
should
be AGAINST.

And that's not gonna happen if we are still trying to learn from the Pradas.
We
are in 2002, remember? Learning from brands is passe, it's from the previous
century. Even some designers realised that, playing down their product
oriented
identity and focusing more on the performance character of their work, on its

autonomy.

Problem with the students is -- in deed -- that they find it more
appealing to dive into technological issues (an area unanimously supported by

the society which they learn to serve), than to do autonomous research, which

requires a type of knoledge that low-to-high education seems to avoid
systematically -- history, theory, general cultural information.

# 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

>Mary (speaking for the Getty, I presume),
>
>Lay off Curt. He doesn't have your pictures. (maybe in response we
>should ALL link to pics at the Getty site). He's even answered very
>nicely about it.
>
>The fact that you are going after him at all, demonstrates a gross
>ignorance about the web. But it's a totally common ignorance in
>corporate-type institutions. No big deal, but the old assumptions
>about "propriety" aren't at all meaningful with the way the web
>works. Stubborn traditionalists are still trying though.
>
>Basically, the way browsers work, is that once a picture is visible,
>EVERYONE gets a copy. Most of us just don't happen to save them.
>In this case, Curt obviously didn't. So, this is squeezing blood
>from a turnip. Your machine, your browser and your internet
>connection are working together to put "your" image on the screen.
>Curt doesn't have it. I don't know who does (probably thousands
>daily), but it could just as easily be a link to you.
>
>If it's simply that you don't want pictures copied in general
>though, that's your own responsibility. (what do you want to be on
>the web for? Or does anyone really know there?) just don't upload
>them. That's all there is to it.
>
>He's not taking away a cent from you anyway and not making a cent
>from work you own, so this is trivial.
>
>Judson

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PLASMA STUDII
http://plasmastudii.org
223 E 10th Street
PMB 130
New York, NY 10003

In a message dated 7/17/2002 6:49:47 PM Central Daylight Time,
office@plasmastudii.org writes:

> >He's not taking away a cent from you anyway and not making a cent
> >from work you own, so this is trivial.
> >
> >Judson

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

In a message dated 7/17/2002 8:50:25 PM Central Daylight Time,
joseph@electrichands.com writes:

> Mary, you opened a real bad can.

Well, I'd prefer to call it "the" real bad can! And me an art lover too.

No offense.

Max Herman
genius2000.net
Buckhouse Johnycakes Two Bits A Stack

++

In a message dated 7/17/2002 10:11:43 PM Central Daylight Time,
Nmherman@aol.com writes:

> Sometimes you just gotta bite back. Ain't no option. Apra Cadapra.
>
> www.geocities.com/genius-2000/getty.JPG

My reference here is not to human dung, but to the Frank Capra classic "It's
a Wonderful Life," in which the workers band together in a home savings and
loan while pursued hotly by old man Potter....

I.e., "Apra De Frank Cabra," a magic word or auto refinishing shop.

Shop.

Max Herman
genius2000.net

++

Subj: Doctor Salemi's Obituary... (fwd)
Date: 7/18/2002 5:45:42 AM Central Daylight Time
From: <A HREF="mailto:cosmoetica@att.net">cosmoetica@att.net</A>
To: <A HREF="mailto:cosmoetica@att.net">cosmoetica@att.net</A>
Sent from the Internet (Details)

----------------- Forwarded Message: ----------------
From: Gilbert purdy <gwpurdy@yahoo.com>
To: Dan Schneider <cosmoetica@att.net>
Subject: Doctor Salemi's Obituary...
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 19:00:43 -0700 (PDT)

Gilbert Wesley Purdy's essay, "Doctor Salemi's
Obituary and the Consumption of Poetry"
(http://www.cosmoetica.com/D27-GWP1.htm), has just
appeared in the "Seek and Destroy" pages of the online
journal Cosmoetica (http://www.cosmoetica.com).
Cosmoetica -- a rough-and-ready literary journal -- is
published by Dan Schneider, poete furieux. William
Heyen, Frederick Turner, Dan Masterson and George
Dickerson are among the intrepid souls to publish in
the pages of this journal which is proud to excoriate
sophistry wherever it finds it -- and manages to
publish fine work by Schneider and his guests, at the
same time.

Links to a selection of other essays/reviews by
Mr. Purdy are provided below:

Het nieuve wereldbeeld: the Magical world of Guy
Davenport:

http://www.elimae.com/essays/purdy/wereldbeeld.html

The Enigma of W. D. Snodgrass:

http://www.elimae.com/essays/purdy/snodgrass.html

The Poet's Progress: the Collected Poems of Eldon
Grier:

http://www.danforthreview.com/reviews/poetry/grier.htm

Sex Trek: The New Generation:

http://www.danforthreview.com/reviews/nonfiction/sex_trek.htm

--
Dan Schneider, cosmoetica@att.net
www.Cosmoetica.com : The Best in
Poetica seeks great poems & essays!

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Ten trading days, 1,360 points off the Dow. Let's
start calling the "sell off" what it is. Let's call it a panic. Let's call it
a crash.

http://money.cnn.com/2002/07/19/news/crash2002/index.htm

from counterpunch

Dithering Democrats
The November forecast looks gloomy.
By Doug Ireland

Gore Vidal's dictum--"America has elections instead of politics"--has
never been more true. As the bipartisan duopoly slouches toward November,
the electorate appears by every measure to be deeply uninterested in the
choices before it.

Just look at the record low participation in the 16 states that held
primaries this spring. On average, only 16.2 percent of eligible voters
bothered to go to the polls, a drop from the 1998 midterm elections (17.6
percent) and less than half the high-point primary participation in 1966.
Nine of the states with early primaries this year reported the lowest
turnouts ever. "No one should have expected that the events of September
11 would have increased political participation," says Curtis Gans,
director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. "What
the citizenry was asked to do was to return to normalcy, consume material
goods and invest in the stock market--hardly clarion calls to civic
involvement. The only exhortation was for an increase in
voluntarism--which tends to be a noblesse oblige, apolitical act."

The dreadful primary turnouts presage a low vote in November--and that's
bad news for Democrats, who traditionally do better the higher the
turnout. Worse, the highly regarded bipartisan "Battleground" poll,
conducted by Democrat Celinda Lake and Republican Ed Goeas, not only
confirms the lack of voter enthusiasm for the elections, but, in a survey
released June 26, shows that Republican voters appear to be more motivated
than Democratic ones. And there's little interest in the fall elections
among two key Democratic constituencies: African-Americans and unmarried
women. Lake calls it "the Bush effect--Republicans are more intense than
Democrats."

Moreover, Republicans are making serious inroads among Latinos: Democratic
pollster Sergio Bendixen's survey of Latino voters for the center-right
New Democrat Network showed that 40 percent would be more likely to
support a candidate endorsed by George Bush (who, Bendixen told the
Washington Post, "has developed a warm rapport with Hispanics similar to
the bond that Bill Clinton enjoyed with African-Americans"). And Bush's
sharp tilt toward the murderous Ariel Sharon has driven many Jewish voters
into the arms of the Republicans. Even a chunk of the gay vote is slipping
away from the Democrats: The GOP got a third of it for Congress in 2000,
according to exit polls of self-identified gays, and the opportunists who
run the Human Rights Campaign--the nation's wealthiest and most visible
gay lobby--have distributed endorsements to a raft of GOP congressional
candidates this year.

Despite the jingoistic mood in the country, Americans are beginning to
understand that Bush's war on terrorism isn't working: A CNN/Gallup poll
released July 10 reveals only 39 percent believe that the United States is
winning the war on terrorism, while 43 percent say "neither" side is
winning. But Bush is even more of a Teflon president than Ronald Reagan
was--nothing seems to stick to him. That same poll showed 71 percent
continue to approve of Bush's conduct of international affairs, and Bush's
overall positive approval rating with three--quarters of the voters has
remained pretty steady for the past several months in every major opinion
survey.

Cowed by these numbers, Democrats have failed to exploit the openings that
current events have given them. Afghanistan has returned to rampant
warlordism, factional assassinations and drug dealing--the same conditions
that gave rise to the Taliban in the first place. CIA footpad Hamid
Karzai's interim government was "elected" by an unrepresentative loya
jirga marked by widespread intimidation and death threats (and then
immediately abolished the Ministry for Women's Affairs--belying the Bush
argument that the war was fought for the emancipation of women). Not a
single al-Qaeda cell or mole has been unearthed here by U.S. intelligence
services, despite Bush's shredding of our civil liberties.

Al Gore finally emerged from hibernation, shaved his beard, and delivered
a speech that was widely reported as a major attack on Bush. But on closer
examination, Gore only made the rather common-sense observation that Bush
had failed to capture Osama bin Laden, without ever dissecting the reasons
for that failure. Dick Gephardt has given Bush a blank check to invade
Iraq, as have Democratic presidential candidates Joe Lieberman and the
"liberal" John Kerry. Some Democrats, like Georgia Sen. Max Cleland, are
running TV spots featuring pictures of themselves with Bush. The campaign
of Missouri's Jean Carnahan boasts that she votes with Bush 71 percent of
the time. And the Democrats' Texas Senate candidate, Ron Kirk, is
promising that "more times than not ... I'll be supportive of the
president."

Even more glaring and indefensible has been the way Democrats have blown
the opportunity to make serious political capital out of the corporate
scandals. From the moment Enron imploded, the Democrats should have made
it a central theme of the congressional campaign. But they failed to do so
because there were too many Democrats in both houses who also had accepted
piles of campaign cash from Ken Lay and his corporate crooks. If you set
aside the $2 million Enron gave in the 2000 presidential campaign, when
Lay and his cronies tilted heavily to Bush, the remaining $4 million given
by the conglomerate to federal candidates since 1989 was almost evenly
divided between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats also raked in boodle
from Enron co-conspirator Arthur Andersen: More than half the House and 94
of 100 Senators took Andersen money in the past decade.

The same is true of WorldCom, which since 1989 has given $7.6 million in
soft money, PAC and individual contributions "spread evenly between the
two national parties," according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In
just the 2001-2002 period alone, WorldCom gave more than $1 million, split
equally between Democrats and Republicans. Global Crossing played the same
game: 55 percent of its $3.5 million since 1999 went to Democrats, 45
percent to the GOP. Terry McAuliffe, the bagman who chairs the DNC, got to
buy pre-IPO shares in the company at an insider's price of $100,000--and
resold them before the company collapsed for an $18 million profit.

In 2000, Democrats also helped scuttle the proposal by then SEC Chairman
Arthur Levitt to ban accountants from simultaneously acting as consultants
to the same firms they audited--this would have closed the loophole that
motored Andersen's participation in the Enron crimes. And, of course, the
accounting industry's puissant lobby--the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants (AICPA)--gave more than $8.5 million between 1989 and
2001, almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.

Indeed, of the 46 members of Congress who wrote letters to the SEC
opposing the Levitt proposal, the one who topped the list of legislators
on the take was New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, who sucked in
$340,000 in campaign cash from AICPA and the "Big Five" largest accounting
firms. So-called "liberal" Democratic congressmen, like Florida's Peter
Deutsch ($131,198) and Connecticut's Jim Maloney ($51,095), as well as
"New Democrats" Ellen Tauscher ($82,801) and Cal Dooley ($65,000) of
California, Washington's Adam Smith ($21,500), and Virginia's Jim Moran
($115,661) made the Top 25 list of those House members who took the most
money from the accounting industry to help kill the reform proposal.

Of course, WorldCom's binge of fraudulently financed acquisitions that
made it the planet's largest communications conglomerate took place during
the corporate-coddling Clinton years, when Bubba turned the Lincoln
Bedroom into a hot-sheet hotel room for corporate crooks, and put a
virtual end to antitrust prosecutions (with the notable exception of
Microsoft, whose Silicon Valley competitors had purchased Clinton and
Gore's loyalty). In a July 10-11 CNN/Time poll, 40 percent blame Clinton
for the corporate scandals, while only 33 percent blame Bush.

That helps explain why it took the brain-dead Democratic leadership so
many long months after Enron's collapse last fall to get on the corporate
reform bandwagon. When Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt finally made a joint
appearance to announce the Democratic alternative to Dubya's rhetorically
strong but toothless speech on the issue, they did so at a podium
decorated with the oxymoronic slogan, "Restore Corporate Trust and
Integrity"--as if either virtue had ever been a hallmark of corporate
America. (If the slogan had been "Put the Crooks in Jail," the Democrats
might have had a better chance of arousing sleepy voters.)

The Democratic proposals were so weak--an oversight board, slightly longer
jail terms in some cases--that they passed the Senate with unanimous or
near-unanimous votes (the White House gave its backdoor approval to the
GOP solons' votes for the Democratic amendments to protect them from
charges of corporate-coddling in the fall campaign--knowing that Tom "The
Hammer" DeLay and his lockstep House GOP troops would ensure an even
weaker final bill when it goes to the House-Senate conference). At the end
of the first day's Senate voting, Daschle appeared on the Jim Lehrer
Newshour to smilingly proclaim that "the differences are narrowing"
between the Democrats and the White House--hardly a rallying cry for a
Democratic victory in November.

The next day, Daschle even connived with the GOP to prevent a series of
amendments to strengthen the reform bill, offered by Democrat Carl Levin
and Republican John McCain, from coming to a floor vote. Among them: a
proposal, supported by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, to count
stock options as an expense against earnings in order to prevent companies
from giving investors false information about corporate balance sheets--an
effort, in other words, to eliminate the loophole that allowed the Enron
crooks and their imitators to walk away with fortunes while their
employees lost their retirement savings. Why was it quashed? The proposal
was anathema to the high-tech execs who provided a huge chunk of the
record $45 million in soft and hard campaign cash the Democrats have
raised so far this cycle. As McCain put it, "The fix is in."

We're in the biggest corporate crisis since l932, the election is only
four months away, and the Democrats still don't have a program to take to
the country," fumes Russ Hemenway, the veteran director of the National
Committee for an Effective Congress. The NCEC calculates that there are
only 37 House races in which the outcome is seriously in doubt. The
Democrats need to pick up seven of those seats to retake control.
(Democratic Rep. Ralph Hall of Texas has already announced that, in the
event of a tie in the makeup of the new House next year, he'll vote with
the Republicans to assure they preserve their majority.) And, Hemenway
says grimly, "Taking seven seats will be like climbing Mount Everest."

Democratic chances of retaining their one-vote Senate control are shaky at
best. Three Democratic incumbents are in serious danger: Minnesota's Paul
Wellstone, Missouri's Carnahan and South Dakota's Tim Johnson; while the
party's best chances of picking up GOP seats are against Colorado's Wayne
Allard and Arkansas' Tim Hutchinson (although both are still leading in
the polls). If New Hampshire's wacky Bob Smith is defeated in the
Republican primary by Rep. John Sununu (son of Bush I's chief of staff),
as seems likely, he'll probably retain the seat for the GOP. The only open
Republican seat the Democrats have an outside chance to pick up is in
Texas, where Kirk has a slim lead at the moment over his GOP opponent. But
Georgia's Cleland and Iowa's Tom Harkin are both facing stiff GOP
challenges.

On the state level, the only real Democratic bright spot this year is in
Michigan, where state Attorney General Jennifer Granholm (who was arrested
during college at an anti-apartheid sit-in) is poised to win the party's
gubernatorial nomination and has a 2-1 lead over her ultra-right GOP
opponent in the polls. But the news is bad for the Dems in other big
states: California Gov. Gray Davis has yet to break 50 percent in any
poll, his negatives are higher than his positives, and his lead over his
GOP opponent has been steadily narrowing (in a race in which Davis'
frantic corporate shakedowns for campaign cash have become a major issue).
New York Gov. George Pataki, having bought off half the labor movement and
a big slice of the Latino vote, will handily defeat whichever of the two
Democrats wins the September primary (barring an unexpected November
breakthrough by a wealthy independent, deficit hawk Tom Golisano). And
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will romp to victory over Janet Reno if, as the
polls suggest, she wins her primary.

And what of the Greens? Ralph Nader, who inexplicably hibernated for six
months after the 2000 elections--throwing away a chance to turn his
legions of volunteers into an effective electoral fighting force while
their enthusiasm was at its peak--resurfaced for the first time in months
on TV news on the same day the WorldCom thieves were taking the Fifth. And
where was dear Ralph? In Havana, warmly greeting Fidel--at a time when he
should have been in Washington leading the charge against corporate fraud.
These issues are Nader's meat and potatoes, but the man has the political
timing of an aardvark.

Moreover, while the Greens are right to run gubernatorial candidates
against Democratic mediocrities in places like New York--where
working-class intellectual Stanley Aronowitz, a well-known figure on the
left, is carrying the party's banner with the feisty slogan "Tax and
spend!"--it's bad strategy and bad politics for the party to put up a
candidate against Minnesota's Wellstone, the Senate's most progressive
member. The Green vote could ensure Wellstone's defeat in a terribly close
race, exposing the alternative party to ridicule (and properly so). Don't
look for any Green breakthroughs this year. [Doug Ireland and I part
company on this comment on Minnesota - ed]

All in all, this election cycle looks so dismal that, as Hemenway puts it,
"one wants to avert one's eyes."

[It is interesting that he gives the Dems such low marks on so many major
issues, yet winds up supporting the (least-worst part of the) party with
his vote and his rhetoric, with little to spare for a party of higher
marks. A common liberal position these days. Alas. - ed]

:.:.:---------------------------------- o .
o ----------------------------------:.:.:

ola

----------------............................-----------------
.....................................................

algo que hacer el domingo ? ? ?
.........................................
------------------------
----------------
- .. - .. -

cyberlounge > museo tamayo > presenta

inmerso > forosonoro .7

espacio-momento de experimentacion sonora
electronica/acustica/analogo/digital >
programa/acto ( x ) invitados especiales..<
domingocadaquincedias > de.una.a.seis

---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------------

quien ///
programa / seleccion / acto

|||||||||||||||||||| arcangel constantini & alvaro
ruiz ||||||||||||||||||||
|||||||||| SID TUNES ||||||||||
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||=
|||||||||||||||

S. I .D

en 1982 Bob Yanes desarrollo el revolucionario chip 6581 conocido como
SID ( sound interface device ) .
el SID era el responsable del procesamiento sonoro de la computadora
comodore 64 <
con este nuevo chip > un sofisticado sintetizador musical < un nuevo genero=

de musica nacio <
artistas como rob hubbard o martin galaway
componia programando el chip SID directamente en assembler
en el boom del video juego
este sintetizador de 3 voces con un amplio rango de frecuencias y un
reducido costo le dio a la comodore 64
capacidades muy adelantadas a su tiempo
empezando a forgar una industria en el procesamiento sonoro digital casero <
compositores programadores, desarrolladores de software < puristas del soni=
do
han mantenido al dia el conocido e inigualable sonido del chip SID >
desarrollado emuladores para varios sistemas operativos entre otros
Win95, Win3.1, Linux, MSDOS, MacOS, AmigaOS, Atari Falcon, BeOS, OS/2, etc
asi como plug in para navegadores e instrumentos VST incorporado a tarjeas=

de sonido
o en instrumentos stand alone como el sidstation<
que nos permiten disfrutar de las miles de composiciones antiguas y
contemporaneas
que nos remiten a los inicios del videojuego y la computacion casera <

http://www.uiah.fi/~spekkola/games/show.html

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||=
|||||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

........................

cuando /// > domingo 28 julio _ - _

de.una.a.seis

http://www.museotamayo.org/forosonoro

+ > > > > > >

domingocadaquincedias > de.una.a.seis

cyberlounge > museo tamayo arte contemporaneo >

inmerso > forosonoro

...........................................

...................................
................

http://www.unosunosyunosceros.com/inmerso
---------------------------------------

Mayores informes al 52 86 65 19 ext. 228 con Paola Berra / Prensa y
Difusion / Museo Tamayo
Paseo de la Reforma y Gandhi S / N. Bosque de Chapultepec, 11580 Mexico,=

D.F. Tels.(52) 52 86 65 19 / 52 86 65 29 Fax. (52) 52 86 65 39
mrtamayo_00@yahoo.com / www.museotamayo.org

Para darte de baja (UNSUBSCRIBE) envia desde tu cuenta de correo ##L@rhiz=
ome.org mensaje blanco a atsyber-baja@eListas.net
Para obtener ayuda escribe a atsyber-info@eListas.net

La lista at/syber es un proyecto de activismo cultural realizado por osca=
r a. garcia ::: + info > http://www.cuadrilumpios.cjb.net

_______________________________________________________________________
Visita nuestro patrocinador:
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
Tops, banadores, short, pareos, ropa de bano, etc.
Pleno Verano Collection -

Some people might say my life is in a rut,

But I'm quite happy with what I got

People might say that I should strive for more,

But I'm so happy I can't see the point.

Somethings happening here today

A show of strength with your boy's brigade

and I'm so happy and you're so kind

You want more money, of course I don't mind

To buy nuclear textbooks for atomic crimes

And the public gets what the public wants

But I want nothing this society's got

I'm going underground (going underground)

Well the brass bands play and feet start to pound

Going underground (going underground)

Well let the boys all sing and let the boys all shout for tomorrow

Some people might get some pleasure out of hate

Me, I've enough already on my plate

People might need some tension to relax

Me, I'm too busy dodging between the flak

What you see here is what you get

You've made your bed, you better lie in it

You choose your leaders and place your trust

As their lies wash you down and their promises rust

You'll see kidney machines replaced by rockets and guns

And the public wants what the public gets

But I don't get what this society wants

I'm going underground (going underground)

Well let the brass bands play and feet start to pound

Going underground (going underground)

So let the boys all sing and the boys all shout for tomorrow

We talk and talk until my head explodes

I turn on the news and my body froze

These braying sheep on my TV screen

Make this boy shout, make this boy scream

Going underground, I'm going underground

I'm going underground, I'm going underground

These braying sheep on my tv screen...

Make this boy shout, make this boy scream...

Going underground (going underground)

Well let the brass band play and feet start to pound

Going underground (going underground)

Well let the boys all sing, and the boys all shout

Going underground (going underground)

Well let the brass band play and feet go pow pow pow

Going underground (going underground)

So let the boys all sing and let the boys all shout.....

.....for tomorrow

Radio Radio

Radio Radio

I was tuning in the shine on the light night dial
doing anything my radio advised
with every one of those late night stations
playing songs bringing tears to me eyes
I was seriously thinking about hiding the receiver
when the switch broke 'cause it's old
They're saying things that I can hardly believe.
They really think we're getting out of control.

Radio is a sound salvation
Radio is cleaning up the nation
They say you better listen to the voice of reason
But they don't give you any choice
'cause they think that it's treason.
So you had better do as you are told.
You better listen to the radio.

I wanna bite the hand that feeds me.
I wanna bite that hand so badly.
I want to make them wish they'd never seen me.

Some of my friends sit around every evening
and they worry about the times ahead
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference
and the promise of an early death
You either shut up or get cut out;
they don't wanna hear about it.
It's only inches on the reel-to-reel.
And the radio is in the hands of such a lot of fools
tryin' to anaesthetise the way that you feel

[Chorus]

Wonderful radio
Marvelous radio
Wonderful radio
Radio, radio...

EVEN THE LOSERS

Well, it was nearly all summer we sat on your roof
Yeah, we smoked cigarettes and we stared at the moon
And I'd show you stars you never could see
Baby, it couldn't have been that easy to forget about me

Baby, time meant n othing, anything seemed real
Yeah, you could kiss like fire and you made me feel
Like every word you said was meant to be
No, it couldn't have been that easy to forget about me

Baby, even the losers get lucky sometimes
Even the lo sers keep a little bit of pride
They get lucky sometimes

Two cars parked on the overpass,
Rocks hit the water like broken glass
I should have known right then it was too good to last
God, it's such a drag when you're livin' in the past

Baby, even the losers get lucky sometimes
Even the losers keep a little bit of pride
They get lucky sometimes

Baby, even the losers get lucky sometimes
Even the losers keep a little bit of pride
Yeah, they get lucky sometimes

Baby, even the losers get lucky sometimes
Even the losers get lucky sometimes

Even the losers get lucky sometimes
Even the losers get lucky sometimes
Even the losers get lucky sometimes

Re: Post-Modernism source of moral equivocation?

by Kubrick, 07.30.02 11:17 pm

max, you know, i've been relatively kind to you—tried to joke with =
you about
your quotes, tried to get you to say something, and then, when i responded =
to
something you said, you get all miffed. You really are a turkey wearing a=

turkey's clothes.

i don't reference anything? actually, i really work hard to make points and=

arguments, but all i get is smutty shitface and mystic max. only rinaldo ha=
s
the decency to carry on a conversation. really.

why is it, may i ask that you're even on this board? don't you have anythin=
g
to do? you're certainly not interested in the moral issues of postmodernism=
.

you have some gall, let me tell you.

Re: Post-Modernism source of moral equivocation?

by maxherman, 07.30.02 11:19 pm

What?

>
It seems to be interesting

PLEASE REMOVE THE FOLLOWING NAMES FROM ANY OF YOUR LISTS:
latinraw@aol.com
jcolina@latinraw.com

Thank You

>
I just would like to know what programs, technologies, devices you use in order to create these pieces.

Thank you.

>
No

Re: PAINTING

by maxherman, 08.21.02 06:59 pm

Here's an oddish website, not mine, any thoughts?

<A HREF="http://www.bobig.com/landscape/">www.bobig.com/landscape/</A>

Re: PAINTING

by welchsonnyo, 08.21.02 11:48 pm

The style is familiar, yet absence of other things make its presence a
haunting, is it too fine? What ever it is you will be sure you did it if?

[<A HREF="http://artforum.com/talkback/replyF03">Reply</A>] [<A HREF="http://artforum.com/talkback/overviewF03">Overview</A>]

If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the
thing itself, but to your own estimate of it; and this you have the power
to revoke at any moment.

Marcus Aurelius 160 AD

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

eu-gene-l portrait with language:

http://www.photo.net/photo/2000pcd1677/koi-98.tcl

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

> Jhon said:
okay, here is where the real issue starts. lets just say for the sake of clarity, the both of you contributed equally in terms of time and creative input to the original project. if this is true she totally has the right to build on the project independently unless you agreed when you first partnered to specifically *not* develop the "codebase" seperately in the future.

...
At this point it stands to reason that you indeed *also* have the right to continue to develop the existing codebase independently of Bea.
...

My reply:
Firstly I would like to emphasize that Mrs. Jeevan Jham is entirely my project in conception and design. I had written the initial concept note and laid down the design and format of the project (the design and the sections of the web site and the initial web pages). Beatrice did help me implement the project and provided infrastructural support - she is a collaborator in that sense. But as far as the authorship of the work is concerned: I am the sole author.

However, if it is still construed that this a co-authored work, I do not understand how one of them can start building on it without the others permission and without informing him/ her. Is that not unethical, if not illegal? Specially when the co-authors have not abandoned the project, or are deceased, or become mentally or physically unstable and incapable of executing the project. How can we both - she and me "also" - develop something independently which is based on a common premise which is the basis of the work? It would be like a film project with a co-written film script which one of the collaborators steals and starts making a film on. When the other guy tries to make a film on the same script the work would lose its credibility and the respectability and merit for its uniqueness. Then it would become a fight between who releases their film first. The second guy will get totally discredited, be looked upon as plagiarizer etc.

If it was possible for me to develop this independently and maintain its uniqueness, why would I fight the issue instead of just doing my version of it? Different versions of this concept are not possible. I alone have the right to develop it.

Bea cannot take my concept and start building on it just because it was lying on her server. She should think of her own original ideas.

-vishal

hi v & all,

for the sake of argument, i'm going to continue to assume
"collaborative" means an equal share. i'm also trying to look at the
problem in the abstract and not the specifics of this case.

vishal R wrote:
...

> However, if it is still construed that this a co-authored work, I do not understand how one of them can start building on it without the others permission and without informing him/ her. Is that not unethical, if not illegal? Specially when the co-authors have not abandoned the project, or are deceased, or become mentally or physically unstable and incapable of executing the project.
>

firstly, nothing is "illegal" here if there wasn't an agreement about
ownership/authorship in the first place. this can be nothing more than a
verbal agreement, and then it goes off to a civil court where it gets
resolved. not likely in this situation so the question becomes a purely
ethical one. if, lets say, me and my wife have a baby and then a
divorce, who gets the baby? unless she or i is a complete incompetant,
we both do. perhaps my ex-wife keeps and cares for the child but i still
have visiting rights. whether she likes it or not, i can take the kid to
the zoo without her.

> How can we both - she and me "also" - develop something independently which is based on a common premise which is the basis of the work? It would be like a film project with a co-written film script which one of the collaborators steals and starts making a film on. When the other guy tries to make a film on the same script the work would lose its credibility and the respectability and merit for its uniqueness. Then it would become a fight between who releases their film first. The second guy will get totally discredited, be looked upon as plagiarizer etc.
>

that's a bad example because that kind of thing actually happens all the
time, and when money is at stake, it goes to court. but back to the
ethical issue, if author A takes the script to a studio who endorse it
and want to make the movie, does author B have the right to reject the
offer even if author A finds it acceptable? under normal circumstances,
A and B would hash it out and some conclusion would be reached. however,
if B is completely unreasonable, thinks that script is worth 3 million
instead of 1 million and refuses to accept anything less, what recourse
is available to author A who feels like 1 million is plenty good enough?
so to me, it seems that the converse isn't right either.

yes, its not so nice if partner A takes a collaborative piece and
develops it independently, but its also not so nice if partner B
categorically refuses to allow it.

best,
j

> rahul, you are a paid employee of nungu. i know about you. you are not a collaborating artist. i suggest you keep out of this discussion as you have no idea what is really going on. you are working "under the leadeship of Bea". your comments are irrelevant. you only stand to make a fool of yourself by opening your mouth. your comments will only get Bea into further trouble as you are mentioning things which are untrue and none of it you can prove.

-vishal

http://www.wizzard.com/gal.3d/Images/Chess1cB.jpeg

Question mark: Is Chess Fascist?

3d modeling is not my cat's pajama's but I saw a usable image last night;
imagine a convex chess board viewed from directly above. (It's from the
cover of Spassky et al's book on the Najdorf Defense invented in the 1930's
by Argentinian Grandmaster Miguel Najdorf (hopefully not a fascist but he
coulda been).

I didn't make the above image, there's another one there of a Go game.

You-Know-Who
genius2000.net

ps--Seriously Ivan, I think it's odd you think I'm Karei. That would mean
that I have all this knowledge about Rastor Noton, Beatrice, and would even
care to argue about it. What is the motive you think I might have to
pretend to be Karei? I've flamed and snitted a tad with him before, months
ago. It just doesn't add up. I think most people know I'm not Karei? I
bet Beatrice could confirm it but she does not support Genius 2K so perhaps
that is a No Go.--mh

++

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

Er ah, this person is a super double secret genius.

I eat fresh basil, picked fresh daily--for the skin you know.

>From: __)_) <cirrusa>
>To: "Max Herman" <maxnmherman@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 18:32:42 -0700
>
>
>On Tuesday, Augu n skin? Expressive p
>line.com/Celebs/Outabout/Archive2002/020821.html?fdcool1
>>r huma ut a erman prod even
>>
>>Also, today marks the second annive decay is all I can suggest. rsary of
>>SFMOMA82700. Go to enjoy it at http://www.geocities.com/
>>
>st 27, 2002, at 03:3 otta in front of the name of a pahrtee? Sweet Lords
>and Ladies above. I bet sales of Smirk 5 PM, Max Herman wrote:
>>genius-2000/SFMO off Ice are driven in part by stories on global warming.
>>And why is fluorescent green the new grabby color fo ar,
>>MA82700.html and may the force be with you (you can't force the force)!
>>
>>Caterpill
>>
>>So you g
>>Max H
>>
>>++
>>
>>
>>http://www.eon
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Join the worldis largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
>>http://www.hotmail.com
>>
>>+ I love this thread's tuna! Leslie Nielsen
>>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>+
>>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

Re: "Expressionism" still a valuable concept?

by thingsthatgo, 09.01.02 07:31 am

Hey Max
Happy Birthday.
My present is an image of bubbly in an hourglass.
Sweet Sips.

++

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, natalie myers wrote:

> STOP VIOLATING ME I HAVE RIGHTS

Nobody has 'violated' your rights natalie.
But then again--you don't have many--
it's just easier to be spineless.

Did you just discover the internet, or do you think what you're doing
is funny? Someone give this girl a beret anda Che Gevara poster, anda
Le Tigre CD.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, natalie myers wrote:

> THERE ARE ONLY TWO KINDS OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD AND YOU ARE ONE OF THEM

Yes. I'm *ONE OF THEM*. Tell us something new, Natalie.

> that is not good enough i want it like marx

Tell that to someone who cares.

> and i prefer romeo and juliet cigars and kim crawford wine and bennies

You do have the taste of a mollusk.

> tell me i am nothing tell me

You are nothing, Natalie. There, feel better?

> call me bad names ya ohhh ya i like it

Nobody has called you 'bad names'. You're calling them yourself,
and screaming it loud and clear. I'm just re-playing it for you.

> ha ha ha ha aha hahha ha ah you are boring. blah blah

Must be. That must be why you keep coming around.
Or is that masochistic habit of yours? Hard to kick it, ne?

Here, have a drink. Courtesy of G2K coffee shop.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

KARIE DU BIST NOT CLOSE TO MY LEVEL.

>From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>Reply-To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>To: <list@rhizome.org>
>Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 16:46:15 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, natalie myers wrote:
>
> > STOP VIOLATING ME I HAVE RIGHTS
>
> Nobody has 'violated' your rights natalie.
> But then again--you don't have many--
> it's just easier to be spineless.
>
> Did you just discover the internet, or do you think what you're doing
> is funny? Someone give this girl a beret anda Che Gevara poster, anda
> Le Tigre CD.
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>
>+ If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

>From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>Reply-To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>To: natalie myers <portholeaccel@yahoo.com>
>CC: <list@rhizome.org>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 00:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, natalie myers wrote:
>
> > THERE ARE ONLY TWO KINDS OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD AND YOU ARE ONE OF THEM
>
> Yes. I'm *ONE OF THEM*. Tell us something new, Natalie.
>
> > that is not good enough i want it like marx
>
> Tell that to someone who cares.
>
> > and i prefer romeo and juliet cigars and kim crawford wine and bennies
>
> You do have the taste of a mollusk.
>
> > tell me i am nothing tell me
>
> You are nothing, Natalie. There, feel better?
>
> > call me bad names ya ohhh ya i like it
>
> Nobody has called you 'bad names'. You're calling them yourself,
> and screaming it loud and clear. I'm just re-playing it for you.
>
> > ha ha ha ha aha hahha ha ah you are boring. blah blah
>
> Must be. That must be why you keep coming around.
> Or is that masochistic habit of yours? Hard to kick it, ne?
>
> Here, have a drink. Courtesy of G2K coffee shop.
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>+ If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

AW, DO IT, ".
"BUT, PERHAPS.. "
"HO. A LOUD DOORBELL CLATTERING WITHIN HIM
WHENEVER HE OPENS HIS MOUTH TO SPEAK?!
THE IMPLICATIONS ARE ENORMOUS..."

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

( " iknewit " )

"

BERLIN, GERMANY (AP) - Recent admissions by an ex-Nazi official living in
Argentina have confirmed what some musicologists have suspected for years:
that early twentieth century German composer Anton Webern and his
colleagues devised the so-called "serial" technique of music to encrypt
messages to Nazi spies living in the United States and Britain.

In what can surely be considered the most brazen instance of Art Imitating
Espionage to date, avant garde composers of the Hitler years working in
conjunction with designers of the Nazi Enigma code were bamboozling
unsuspecting audiences with their atonal thunderings while at the same time
passing critical scientific data back and forth between nations.

"This calls into question the entire Second Viennese School of music,"
announced minimalist composer John Adams from his home in the Adirondack
Mountains. "Ever since I first encountered compositions by Arnold Schonberg
I wondered what the hell anyone ever heard in it. Now I know."

Gunned down by an American soldier in occupied Berlin, 62 year old Anton
Webern's death was until now considered a tragic loss to the musical world.
At the time the U.S. Army reported that the killing was "a mistake", and
that in stepping onto the street at night to smoke a cigarette Webern was
violating a strict curfew rule.

It is now known that Webern was using music to shuttle Werner Heisenberg's
discoveries in atomic energy to German spy Klaus Fuchs working on the
Manhattan atom bomb project in New Mexico. Due to the secret nature of the
project, which was still underway after the invasion of Berlin, Army
officials at the time were unable to describe the true reason for Webern's
murder.

Hans Scherbius, a Nazi party official who worked with Minister of
Propaganda Joseph Goebbels, admitted at age eighty-seven that the Nazis
secretly were behind the twelve-tone technique of composition, which was
officially reviled to give it the outlaw status it needed to remain outside
of the larger public purview.

"These pieces were nothing more than cipher for encoding messages," he
chuckled during an interview on his balcony in Buenos Aires. "It was only
because it was 'naughty' and difficult that elite audiences accepted it,
even championed it."

Physicist Edward Teller, who kept a 9-foot Steinway piano in his apartment
at the Los Alamos laboratory, was the unwitting deliverer of Heisenburg's
data to Fuchs, who eagerly attended parties thrown by Teller, an
enthusiastic booster of Webern's music.

Arnold Schonberg, the older musician who first devised the serial technique
at the request of the Weimar government of Germany, composed in America to
deliver bomb data stolen by Fuchs back to the Nazis, who worked feverishly
to design their own atomic weapons.

As an example, Scherbius showed Associated Press reporters the score of
Webern's Opus 30 "Variations for Orchestra" overlaid with a cardboard
template. The notes formed a mathematical grid that deciphered into German
a comparison between the neutron release cross-sections of uranium isotopes
235 and 238.

Schonberg responded with a collection of songs for soprano and woodwinds
that encrypted the chemical makeup of the polonium-beryllium initiator at
the core of the Trinity explosion.

And in Japan, Toru Takemitsu took time out from his own neo-romanticism to
transmit data via music of his nation's progress with the atom.

"The most curious thing about it," says composer Philip Glass in New York
City, "is that musicians continued to write twelve-tone music after the
war, even though they had no idea why it was really invented. Indeed, there
are guys who are churning out serialism to this day."

Unlike the diatonic music, which is based on scales that have been agreed
upon by listeners throughout the world for all of history, twelve-tone
music treats each note of the chromatic scale with equal importance, and
contains a built-in mathematical refusal to form chords that are pleasing
by traditional standards. Known also as serialism, the style has never been
accepted outside of an elite cadre of musicians, who believe it is the only
fresh and valid direction for post-Wagnerian classical music to go.

"Even if this is really true," states conductor Pierre Boulez, a composer
who continues to utilize serial techniques, "the music has been vindicated
by music critics for decades now. I see no reason to suddenly invalidate an
art form just because of some funny business at its inception."

"

( " http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/weekly/aa062998.htm " )

------------------------------------------------------------
--------------lo--------------------------------------------
-
-----------------------y------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
-------------PTRz:
http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/incubation/gallery.cfm
www.muse-apprentice-guild.com
http://www.krikri.be/poeuk.html
http://www.google.com/search?q=lo_y
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------

Eryk scribbled:

> Brilliant comments! You are amazing!

Right. Unlike yours which are derogatory,
inaccurate, and condescending.
Not a happy camper baby?
Besides they were for Max.

So I won't rally under G2K.
Won't buy Eryk's Icon.

Could this be the real reason why you two 'flame'
people? Your posts are full of rambling,
parroting of important literature padding,
and cheap slogans.

And don't tell me that I don't know you, baby.
I know you better than you know yourself.

Funny Eryk, but I've also passed on not only zen
statements, but also a number of fluxus attitudes,
and you've condescended to all.

Could it be because you don't UNDERSTANd either
unless there is a label easily, flatly, and
simplistically identifying it?

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/news/2002/09/06/athletics\_twins\_ap/

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, manik wrote:

> There's no answer:"Do you speek English!Put Your Enlish in your own
> counry.Dick sockers!Anglosaxonians are nice on first lewel,but if push them
> they can be nasty.So,again,What do you want with your pathetic
> atitude?Respect?Pusi kurac.

Yes. Off with all Anflosaxon heads.
Total Slowenian World Domination.

Doesn't humanity make you feel rosy?

On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, manik wrote:

> Oh,sory Phyrro!

I am not Phyrro.

> Sexstus Empiricus

Wow. You can quote Latin.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

>
It took a long time for anything to come up. I got impatient and quit

Logos starts the process of evolution..

[one must be female + receive before becoming.male]

[Max: I like it when no-one dares to argue with me.

But if a female tells me I'm a control-freak,

she's a psychotic nympho-maniac.]

how does a word become matter?

How does it become a real live person?"

--Joseph Beuys

'The first refusal to a person who is devoid of conscience or
consideration will destroy the resukts of even thousands of
good deeds formerly manifested toward him by you'.

Damn right, Norbert Wiener's "Human Use of Human Beings," Mark Stahlman, you
name it.

I guess that's why they call me the working man.

>From: { brad brace } <bbrace@wiredmag.com>
>Reply-To: { brad brace } <bbrace@wiredmag.com>
>To: list@rhizome.org, avant-garde@lists.village.virginia.edu
>Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re:
>Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:11:30 -0800
>
>
>The magic of the free market would be revealed as black magic, dependent on
>slavery and inequality in order to function. But before the pyramid scheme
>toppled, technology stepped in and put a new twist on it. It didn't replace
>human labor with machines. It used humans as machines.
>
>
>
>
>
>The 12hr-ISBN-JPEG Project >>>> since 1994 <<<<
>
>+ + + serial ftp://ftp.eskimo.com/u/b/bbrace
>+ + + eccentric ftp://ftp.idiom.com/users/bbrace
>+ + + continuous ftp:// < your site here >
>+ + + hypermodern ftp://ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace
>+ + + imagery ftp://ftp.pacifier.com/pub/users/bbrace
>
> News://alt.binaries.pictures.12hr ://a.b.p.fine-art.misc
>
> Reverse Solidus: http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/
> Mirror: http://www.eskimo.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html
>
>
> { brad brace } <<<< bbrace@eskimo.com >>>> ~finger for pgp
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>+ If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

maxherman log out

RECENT
POSTINGS
ROBERTC.MORGAN
Web is a Performance Medium
WILL CAUGHT-ON
Are you there God? It's me, MargaretHelen!
Master trope chestnut how to choose a cover by Jack Bankowsky.
9/11: art or craft?
I HEART CHARLIE

Let's vote on G2K

by Unbeatable, 07.31.02 02:23 pm

OK, is everyone as tired of Max Herman's boring self-promotion as I am?

Let's vote on whether or not we ever want to hear about Genius 2000 again.
Only people who've been posting regularly should be voting, otherwise Max
could just come up with a bunch of new names and vote for his continued saty
on our island.

So let's hear from Biggy, controlyhorse, margrethelen, bprevidi, arthands,
cutup, st. violentime, Joseph Franklin, thingsthatgo, so-far-away, and all
the others on whether or not we really want to hear about G2K.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by Unbeatable, 07.31.02 02:24 pm

I vote:

NO, I DON'T EVER WANT TO HEAR ABOUT G2K AGAIN.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by maxherman, 07.31.02 08:13 pm

I wouldn't object to a vote, I would actually agree never to mention certain
words or phrases on list.

I'd also agree to post less, say once a week; never start any threads; I
would also agree never to argue with anyone or use insulting language or
"personal" critiques.

I'll just vote once, and the idea just to count votes only from regular
posters is fully legit. I vote No, maxherman should not ever mention certain
phrases and words or promote his own work on Talkback any more, nor should
he argue or use "personal" criticism to illustrate his points.

In fact, if the vote goes against me, I'll even agree to peacebly leave the
Talkback indefinitely, if people think that's the way to go.

Regards,

Max Herman

++

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by Kubrick, 07.31.02 08:50 pm

i'd be happy about not hearing about genius 2000, though i'm not really sure
what that is.

actually, i want to hear about your Adorno master's thesis. how come you've
not chimed in more about the historicism/pomo thread if you'd done you're
benjamin?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by Carlacam, 07.31.02 10:09 pm

I didn't make your list of regular posters, but I'm casting my vote anyway.

I vote NO, I never want to hear about Genius2000 again.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by cutup, 07.31.02 11:03 pm

I do not object to hearing from Max Herman if he sticks to the topic and
does not veer off into self-promotion.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by kittyking, 07.31.02 11:49 pm

I've never heard of Unbeatable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by BPrevidi, 08.01.02 01:04 am

I agree with cutup, I don't mind hearing from you (Max) as long as it's
about the topic-at-hand; but more often than not, it's about the
topic-at-hand's relevance to G2K.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Let's vote on G2K

by thingsthatgo, 08.01.02 02:59 am

Is this where I can get some sun screen lotion?
I'm sorry what?
Lynching!
Is it total block?
Oh, down on the fourth?
Thank you for your time.
Elevators! Who has the time to look at those flashing numbers !!

(aside) If I had sun block I wouldn't need an elevator.

Max I have never minded and when it comes to the self promotion which I got
the first time, well I know where to find G2K, but the cut and paste doesn't
work over here

On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:

> Hi Kandinskij. Just as a point of reference, Vuk Cosic never "starred" in any of his ascii movies that I am aware of,

My statement did not imply that Vuk Cosic starred in his own films.
The people in his movies--did star in them.

> Well the limitations of interactivity are not a new question to net.art. But I take issue with the idea that the piece is not interactive.

It isn't. Nomore than a candy bar machine is 'interactive'.

> You can arrange the color fields to your own liking. While this is not
> "immersive" interactivity, the user still dictates the appearance of
> the piece to a degree [and certainly more than one would in video art,
> for example] so I think it's still legitimately "interactive."

No--all of the choices are pre-coded. The user 'selects'.
By that token museums have been interactive before the internet.
You can walk around the exhibits in whatever way you want.

> I consider it abstracted because it is not [and was not intended to be] a direct documentation of reality. Since I trust your authority on words, I have taken it upon myself to look up "abstract" in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, and I see that perhaps you are using the word in a way that I and Merriam-Webster are not familiar with. Here are the definitions of the word "abstract":

You can consider--ie, fantasize whjatever you please--and you can write
tomes about it if you please--it's still crap.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

Wasn't Jevbratt's "Stillman Project" for the Walker interactive using just
the three colors?

>From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>Reply-To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>To: Eryk Salvaggio <eryk@maine.rr.com>
>CC: <list@rhizome.org>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 08:04:05 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:
>
> > Hi Kandinskij. Just as a point of reference, Vuk Cosic never "starred"
>in any of his ascii movies that I am aware of,
>
> My statement did not imply that Vuk Cosic starred in his own films.
> The people in his movies--did star in them.
>
> > Well the limitations of interactivity are not a new question to net.art.
>But I take issue with the idea that the piece is not interactive.
>
> It isn't. Nomore than a candy bar machine is 'interactive'.
>
> > You can arrange the color fields to your own liking. While this is not
> > "immersive" interactivity, the user still dictates the appearance of
> > the piece to a degree [and certainly more than one would in video art,
> > for example] so I think it's still legitimately "interactive."
>
> No--all of the choices are pre-coded. The user 'selects'.
> By that token museums have been interactive before the internet.
> You can walk around the exhibits in whatever way you want.
>
> > I consider it abstracted because it is not [and was not intended to be]
>a direct documentation of reality. Since I trust your authority on words, I
>have taken it upon myself to look up "abstract" in the Merriam-Webster
>online dictionary, and I see that perhaps you are using the word in a way
>that I and Merriam-Webster are not familiar with. Here are the definitions
>of the word "abstract":
>
>
> You can consider--ie, fantasize whjatever you please--and you can write
> tomes about it if you please--it's still crap.
>
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>+ If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

Don poo hoo them candy-bar machine.
Gitcher mashica art products from the bellamatic!

[ www.bellamatic.com ]
[ www.mashica.com/certification/certification/oiltanks.asp ]

Get also,
[ www.artomat.org ]

Love,
mashica

----- Original Message -----
From: Eryk Salvaggio
To: list@rhizome.org
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 7:01 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re:

> Well the limitations of interactivity are not a new question to net=
.art. But I take issue with the idea that the piece is not interactive.

It isn't. Nomore than a candy bar machine is 'interactive'.

But a candy bar machine is interactive. In fact, vending machine art has =
some serious potential I think. I'm not kidding, either.

On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:

> Well, the original ascii movies that are on Vuk Cosic's web site are
> actually conversions of classics such as "star trek" etc; so I didn't
> think of these as "original ascii productions" in the way mine is. So
> while you can call Linda Lovelace or William Shatner "the first ascii
> movie stars" I guess you'd be right, it's all up to interpretation.

No, it isn't. But I don't feel like explaining.

> Jessica Johnson is, as far as I know,

As far as I know is not an excuse.

> the first person filmed directly for the sake of an ascii-based film.

Bollocks. People were doing it on IRC 5 years ago quite a bit,
and 10 years ago too--just because they were 'excited' about it
and not because they were interested in 'art careers'.

It's sickening how now that there is money thrown by museums
and galleries into these things leeches like you who KNOW better
(and you do--you're some naive academic guy who's lived locked
in a room in the past 5 years not knowing what goes on net-wise)
declare themselves the 'first' and 'original' and attempt to package
'street culture' in net.theory [cf. Max Herman attempting to whore out
the sub-cultures associated with bands into museums--when the people
themselves never cared to be used for such purposes] and make themselves
careers out of it.

> Anyway, it's not really the point of the piece,

Oh right. *Slight* what you wrote to lessen the gravity of what you do.
Try to pass that one elsewhere. If it's not important why put it
in the 'ad-space' adjunct to the title of the piece?
Because you know it's an ad-space, and you know it 'hooks' attention.

> so I guess we can agree to disagree.

No 'we' can't. I am not you, nor do you speak for me.
What you wrote is blatant falsifying + distorting self-promotional
propaganda. This is what +I+ agree.

> But a candy bar machine is interactive. In fact, vending machine art has
> some serious potential I think. I'm not kidding, either.

I have little doubts. Your idiocy is limitless.

> Maybe if you suggested some work that you consider "truly" interactive I
> would be able to understand you better?

I could, and have. But in order to see it, you must evolve individually.
As you are, I might as well read you the 'hidden sutras'--and you'll
spit back worthless + flat 'opinions.'

> The way I see it, if one is
> staying with basic html the entire idea of "interaction" is going to be
> limited, but this is one of the interesting aspects of the fundamental
> medium to me.

Incorrect. Interactivity is not dependent on technological
aspects.

> Sorry you feel that way, Kandinskij.

I don't 'feel' that way, Eryk. It's how it is.

> I've got a lot of positive reviews about it so far,

And that's what really_ determines the value of what you do, yes?

> and yours has been the only negative reaction to it I have seen.

It's neither 'reaction' nor 'negative'.
Take your plus minus knee-jerk idiocy elsewhere.

You can 'add' as many pluses as you care to--the only thing you do
is delude yourself + others. that'd be how you make the world a better
place, n'est pas? Or is it that you're only interested in
self-aggrandizement? Sounds closer to reality, baby.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

>From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>To: Max Herman <maxnmherman@hotmail.com>
>CC: <eryk@maine.rr.com>, <thingist@bbs.thing.net>, <list@rhizome.org>
>Subject: Re: RHIZOME\_RAW: Re:
>Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 11:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Max Herman wrote:
>
> > Wasn't Jevbratt's "Stillman Project" for the Walker interactive using
>just
> > the three colors?
>
> And so? The two are not related.
> Just because one monkey did something stupid,
> it doesn't mean any sort of justification.

This is Delmore Schwartz, who was Lou Reed's English Prof at Syracuse, and
took photos of him in female underwear, and told him to be a great writer:
"In Dreams Begin Responsibilities," a very G2K story.

>*In dreams begins responsibility*. W. B. Yeats.
>
> `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, josh zeidner wrote:

> why preach in a whorehouse?

Dear Josh--when will you stop attempting to direct my actions
under the guise of understanding what I am doing? I am not
preaching--nor do i intend to make queens out of whores.

So now that weve got that cleared: what is it that you_
want?

I love Ivan's 'private' missives.

On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Ivan Pope wrote:

> Wasilly,

Who? I am not my grandfather.

> Well, I do love your frantic involvement

There is nothing 'frantic' in my involvement.

> in this pathetic little list.

Which pathetic little list, dear?

> I mean, to you everyone on it is an idiot who knows nothing.

No, this is not the case--and your pathetic misinterpretation of what
you fail tosee is your own problem.

> You, on the other hand, know everything.

Surely. But I doubt your idea of knowledge approaches my understanding
of it.

> You have no concept of the give and take.

You are completely and absolutely 100% right. The 'give and take' is a
form of energy drain. The real 'giving' is not about 'give and take'.

> You have no acceptance that the world is made up of a bit of this
> and a bit of that.

Nope--the 'world' is not made up of bits of this and bits of that--
this is how the brain butchers reality.

> Nope, your worldview is fascist - you know everything.

You're an idiot: do you know what fascism is?
There is nothing fascist about knowing 'everything'.

> Everyone else is driven by their own self promoting ego.

This is absolutely NOTHINg that I have said.
The individuals observed are--including yourself.
I've never made--nor will make statements about 'everybody'
as such statements are indeed fascist in the sense propre of
the word.

> You alone do not suffer from this

I don't--does that bother you? can't sleep in your shit so comfortably?
I never made any claims of being alone--twit.

> (well, except when you tell us that your work was bought by
> some top european architects for their office)

And this hasn't got anything to do with ego. You're one of the pathetic
morons who fancy an ego-less person being a weak dishrag who doesn't
do anything, doesn't appear in public, and certainly doesn't succeed
in any affair--n'est pas?

You're not qualified to judge people's egoes before you've dealt with
your own. You pathetic opinions are-worthless. Total value: zero.

> What I do not understand is why you bother.

Very good. Who do you think you are that my actions must be
justifiable to you?

> Surely you have risen into the light by now and do not need to spend your wise words berating us mere
> mortals.

Don't attempt to pass judgements on things which you are FAR from
understanding. No wait--this one here is going to 'judge'
enlightenment.

> My view is

100% worthless.

> that you are either a sad sick person

I am neither 'sad' nor 'sick'--but rather you are--as can be evidenced
by your pathological mechanically-looped attempts at a. feeding b.
debasement.

> or you are, as I originally suggested, a bot - whether you know it or not.

No, dear--that's you. Whether you know it or not.
Spare us your 'snif' concern--condescending attempts to feed.
Tell us again about your 'poor insane best friend' whom you keep
denying--again and again.

And again, anda gain--not-addressing anything of what I write--
just bland + lame attempts at debasement (cf. Burroughs + vampirism).

later loser.

On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Ivan Pope wrote:

> I reply just to you, but your ego demands that you respond to the whole
> list.

No dear. It is not my ego--neither are you qualified to judge that.

> It is clear that you get your kicks arguing in public.

No, baby--what you are doing is a standard 'overly-familiar' behavior.
You are not my friend--I've no desire to communicate with you privately,
no less with possible idiotic 'he said this and that privately'
situations. Ypu've got a long way to go before deserving a private
e-mail. In net.terms--you haven't been invited to my house.
Don't invite yourself in. I have all right to throw you out.

> You think you are egoless,

I don't 'think' that I am. I am. Nor are you qualified to judge that.

> but you do so love your little soapbox.

No, I don't. There is no 'soapbox'. Spare me your projections.

> > And this hasn't got anything to do with ego.
> >
> No, no, of course not. There, there.

And your idiotic condescension.

> > No, dear--that's you. Whether you know it or not.
>
> Yah, boo, sucks. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah.

Sorry--I never wrote, said. or implied anything of the sort.
Funny--again you skip all I write, and post idiotic
bully posturing instead.

> Whats up? Run out of insults?

I don't insult, love. Stomp your foot as much as you please,
act like an imbecilic idiot as well (as above)--but I am neither
going to start insulting you, nor instantaneously grow an ego.

> You do have a habit of throwing my words back at me like a schoolchild.

No, I don't. Until you've dealt with your ego, all your words are about
yourself. Additionally, you're incapable of perceiving reality--be it
me, or anyone else. Nothing schoolchildish in my pointing this out--
and refusing your pathetic attempts to force-imprint your 'opinions'.

Go lock yourself in your artist stuidio and beat yourself up,
and spare me your idiocy and pathetic bully behavior.

Watch out--Ivan Pope's toe has been stepped on.
Insta-ego specialist--I mean murderer.

This correspondence is painful to read.

----- Original Message -----
From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
To: <list@rhizome.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:28 PM

>
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Ivan Pope wrote:
>
> > I reply just to you, but your ego demands that you respond to the whole
> > list.
>
> No dear. It is not my ego--neither are you qualified to judge that.
>
> > It is clear that you get your kicks arguing in public.
>
> No, baby--what you are doing is a standard 'overly-familiar' behavior.
> You are not my friend--I've no desire to communicate with you privately,
> no less with possible idiotic 'he said this and that privately'
> situations. Ypu've got a long way to go before deserving a private
> e-mail. In net.terms--you haven't been invited to my house.
> Don't invite yourself in. I have all right to throw you out.
>
> > You think you are egoless,
>
> I don't 'think' that I am. I am. Nor are you qualified to judge that.
>
> > but you do so love your little soapbox.
>
> No, I don't. There is no 'soapbox'. Spare me your projections.
>
> > > And this hasn't got anything to do with ego.
> > >
> > No, no, of course not. There, there.
>
> And your idiotic condescension.
>
> > > No, dear--that's you. Whether you know it or not.
> >
> > Yah, boo, sucks. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah.
>
> Sorry--I never wrote, said. or implied anything of the sort.
> Funny--again you skip all I write, and post idiotic
> bully posturing instead.
>
> > Whats up? Run out of insults?
>
> I don't insult, love. Stomp your foot as much as you please,
> act like an imbecilic idiot as well (as above)--but I am neither
> going to start insulting you, nor instantaneously grow an ego.
>
> > You do have a habit of throwing my words back at me like a schoolchild.
>
> No, I don't. Until you've dealt with your ego, all your words are about
> yourself. Additionally, you're incapable of perceiving reality--be it
> me, or anyone else. Nothing schoolchildish in my pointing this out--
> and refusing your pathetic attempts to force-imprint your 'opinions'.
>
> Go lock yourself in your artist stuidio and beat yourself up,
> and spare me your idiocy and pathetic bully behavior.
>
> Watch out--Ivan Pope's toe has been stepped on.
> Insta-ego specialist--I mean murderer.
>
>
>
>
>
> + If the reader will keep me company I shall be glad.
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, rusin wrote:

> Forget my e-mail

And your telephone number?

On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Matthew Bradwell wrote:

> This correspondence is painful to read.

It is isn't it? But then again, most conversations are
masked similarity of the sort, so is most contemporary art,
so is the way humans treat each other. Nevermind the 'bashing'
of 'children' when they in fact have none of the 'adult'
pre-sets to 'ignore' this stuff.

Walk out on the street and pick any two human beings in any
environment: their interaction consists largely of two
(brain)-driven sexual automatons damaging each other.

Nevermind that the ones 'respected' are those who are the
biggest 'bullies' in that game; never-mind that most_ of
contemporary art as it is is blowing up and support of
exactly those 'bullies'.

But if this is brought out in public in all its ugliness,
little doubt it's all because the person painting the picture
is 'abusive'. And the reaction? Kill the perpetrator, instead of
looking at the problem in oneself.

Disclaimer: this is not 'all' I am doing (just because I'm sure
some idiot will have it all figured out from the above and attempt
to crucify me over my words).

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

..the idea that someone may be able to read a language and therefore
can interpret its data properly is a specious argument, because the
one certainly does not guarantee the other.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

I definitely agree with this list. However I do not agree that they are
truly victims. Victims are those you capitulate to what has been enforced
upon them.

I used to understand this line of thinking, what with the consequences of
pain, humiliation, death, etc.

But if death will come anyway, why should we allow people to use it against
us?

> Recent victims: Eryk Salvaggio. Max G2K. Alex Slab. NN.
> Adrian Ward. Young + crushed + delectably consumed, publicly.
>
> The crowd always enjoys feeding + spectacle.

Terrence writes;

Improperly or not anyone can interpret informational data or language in
anyway. whether or not they can utilize the particular information given is
another thing, and even if they can but don't then there lies the
information, for some, forever, locked in its form. Take marc Lafias pos;
One can read and interpret but as experience dictates just how it is
interpreted depends on various sets of experiences with similar information.
Say in the subset of knowledge that a student or practitioner of film may
bring to its reading will determine how the information is interpreted. If
it brings fourth an active response, say a critical one, that is, for its
sake, well composed, I supposes that interpretation could be, upon
examination, of some convention that is agreeable as a proper if indeed an
enlightening interpretation. I can agree however that interpretations are
rarely challenged and there are no guaranties in any reading. However if the
information is interpreted correctly, even erroneously, or even against
convention and actively utilised in some form then that interpretation of
the language form is rightly active and judged in its own right and deserved
of some merit.

best

T.

>From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>Reply-To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
>To: <list@rhizome.org>
>CC: <thingist@BBS.THING.NET>
>Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:56:25 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> ..the idea that someone may be able to read a language and therefore
>can interpret its data properly is a specious argument, because the
>one certainly does not guarantee the other.
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
>
>
>+ left sock first, pompe dans le cul afterwards
>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

well,
1-/ push your finger into your nose
2-/ if you can touch the brain and then it makes you fart
3-/ so it happens in the brain II.

--
OG
-/ surgery is no use in this case ! /-

----- Original Message -----
From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
To: "Terrence Kosick" <terrencekosick@hotmail.com>
Cc: <list@rhizome.org>; <thingist@bbs.thing.net>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 3:53 PM
Subject: [thingist] Re:

> > Terrence writes;
> >
> > Improperly or not anyone can interpret informational data or language
in
> > anyway.
>
> Nein. Interpretation does not happen in the brain.
>
> `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

I was very hurt by NN. Intimidated. NN is a male. Maybe one day he'll admit=
this.

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Matthew Bradwell wrote:

> I was very hurt by NN.

Why?

> Intimidated.

By what?

> NN is a male. Maybe one day he'll admit this.

How do you know? What is a 'male'?

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
trying to find the other mail

You shall know a word by the company it keeps."

-Ludwig Wittgenstein

--- Terrence Kosick <terrencekosick@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Terrence writes;
>
> Improperly or not anyone can interpret informational
> data or language in
> anyway. whether or not they can utilize the
> particular information given is
> another thing, and even if they can but don't then
> there lies the
> information, for some, forever, locked in its form.
> Take marc Lafias pos;
> One can read and interpret but as experience
> dictates just how it is
> interpreted depends on various sets of experiences
> with similar information.
> Say in the subset of knowledge that a student or
> practitioner of film may
> bring to its reading will determine how the
> information is interpreted. If
> it brings fourth an active response, say a critical
> one, that is, for its
> sake, well composed, I supposes that interpretation
> could be, upon
> examination, of some convention that is agreeable as
> a proper if indeed an
> enlightening interpretation. I can agree however
> that interpretations are
> rarely challenged and there are no guaranties in any
> reading. However if the
> information is interpreted correctly, even
> erroneously, or even against
> convention and actively utilised in some form then
> that interpretation of
> the language form is rightly active and judged in
> its own right and deserved
> of some merit.
>
>
> best
>
> T.
>
> >From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+"
> <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
> >Reply-To: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+"
> <death@zaphod.terminal.org>
> >To: <list@rhizome.org>
> >CC: <thingist@BBS.THING.NET>
> >Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 12:56:25 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >
> > ..the idea that someone may be able to read a
> language and therefore
> >can interpret its data properly is a specious
> argument, because the
> >one certainly does not guarantee the other.
> >
> >`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
> >
> >
> >+ left sock first, pompe dans le cul afterwards
> >-> post: list@rhizome.org
> >-> questions: info@rhizome.org
> >-> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> >-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> >+
> >Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> out in the
> >Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger:
> http://messenger.msn.com
>
> + une dans la gueule, and two for tea !
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set
> out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com