Eryk Salvaggio
Since the beginning
Works in Ogunquit, Massachusetts United States of America

PORTFOLIO (1)
BIO
The Harry Potter of the Digital Avant Garde." - Pieter van Bogaert, of the Belgian Newspaper "TIJD", 09/03/02.

Discussions (384) Opportunities (0) Events (1) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

ASCII World Cup


http://ascii-wm.net/

Just to be clear, I had nothing to do with this, but I thought I'd share.

-er.

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: notes for a hypothetical essay on relocating


Authentic works of power are capable of directing an energy which make the work desireable to contact (and/or possess, since ownership of an item with that ability is enough to elevate a peasant into the aristocracy, by virtue of recognizing the
power the item has, all Holy Grail like). Maybe it's hocus pocus superstition hyperromantic stuff, but I don't think it is all that ethereal at all. I'm an athiest, +/-, and I still believe in it; it's something innate and beyond mythology but yeah,
something spawns mythology, right? I would hesitate to say there's nothing to it: some art is about play and some art is about power, we all know where play comes from, but conveying true power through a work is not a simple matter and poor attempts
to do it are disasterous, but when it works, it works, and there's no disputing it.

I don't have an answer to the shaman question, but it's one I've been thinking about: can the web disseminate power in the same way that an artifact, or a tangible presence can? Whenever we distribute we run the risk of diluting, this
aura/baraka/good-artness comes from an object but also depends on others to see and percieve it; a good work can change the way one sees but a bad seer can change the way the art is seen. Transmission on the web depends on these bad seers to pass it
along anyway, with their own twists and frames. It is true of a lot of modern art, on and offline.

I'll get in trouble for this: In religious orders, the transmission of data is a sacred act, with high awareness of conveying truth (and a high awareness of generational degradation of transmitted knowledge). IE, instead of simply making photocopies
of sacred information, it actually has to be re-realized by a pupil internally, as well as transmitted to them. You don't just dub the superbowl tape, you play the game yourself.

The web doesn't really inspire this; it is a many to many medium, devoid of the power of the one to one. We are all fancying ourselves as teachers now- I'll go online to "share" what I "know"- and I'll talk until I'm blue in the face, a situation
hostile to learning. I am not this way. The web does not encourage me into solitude and reflection, or careful consideration, it encourages me to convey orders and broadcast statements. It allows anyone to pick up a semblance of understanding (let's
do a wiki search on Baraka!) without doing any of the hard, internal work that makes the understanding true. The thing is, this is not a limitation of the web, it's a limitation of its users, a generation and a half of television addled broadcast
junkies who think blogs are collaborative... :)

Shutting up,
-er.

Eric Dymond <dymond@idirect.ca> on Saturday, June 03, 2006 at 2:12 AM -0500 wrote:
>curt cloninger wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> I don't mean "magic" as in "sleight of hand." I mean "magic" as in
>> "mystical/spiritual." "Magic" is not a word I would choose (it has
>> pejorative connotations). Simply put, I believe in a real spirit
>> realm. "Real spirit" is not oxymoronic to me. I believe the best art
>> traffics in this realm -- not exclusively, but to a substantial
>> degree. Furthermore, it traffics in this realm regardless of whether
>> or not the artist or the audience intellectually believes in this
>> realm.
>>
>
>so do you believe their are Shaman on the internet?
>Eric
>+
>-> 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

DISCUSSION

horizontal vs vertical


Here's my stab at it:

Horizontal scaling always overrides vertical unless the horizontal is willing to destroy itself. The network survives an atomic bomb, so (and I will repeat this until someone recognizes its truth or at least its wit:) In the rock paper scissors
model, where paper can beat a rock, the web beats atom bomb.

So, vertical loses to horizontal. This can be good (the horizontal is not always clear) but in terms of what this does to our cultivation of will, and that sort of libertarian diy kind of internal locus of control, we might find we prefer an atom
bomb falling from the sky. At least with the A-Bomb, the devastation is recognizeable, physical, and limited in its boundaries. A horizontal world can destroy us slower and without boundaries and dress itself up as democratic revolution (when it is
just as likely to be the triumph of pigs!) but at least with horizontal, at any point we can wake up and unplug. I mean, the lack of physical death is always better than the presence of physical death. The horizontal has always been willing to
destroy to keep up.

But I change my mind about this every day. The reality is that horizontal living is gonna hit us on a level way bigger than grassroots democracy and social networking. It is likely to change the entire way we see our self and culture: created by
vote by a community with ideas deemed bad because they were minus-pointed by more people in the user interface.

"We've decided collectively to drop the a-bomb!"

It's why I think a collaborative grant for community project building is both a great idea and a terrible one.

-er.

Eric Dymond <dymond@idirect.ca> on Thursday, May 18, 2006 at 11:46 PM -0500 wrote:
>I lied,
>My last entry is:
>does vertical scaling(Mark Tribe, steve Deitz, G.H.) always override horizontal scaling (myself, Brad Brace, Valery Grancher)?
>Eric
>+
>-> 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

DISCUSSION

Re: namjune();paik()


Thanks Maya, I appreciate it.

I was sitting at a presentation of a $9000 Synthesizer and as the representative was talking about how elegant it was at reproducing piano and violin sounds, I realized I would rather have one of those early casiotone toy keyboards from the 80's
that sounded like trash. But I don't think the music people make with them is trash at all, in fact, I think there's more value in squeezing something out of a tool organically than there is in picking and choosing which pre-built beautiful part
we'll use. I guess the same goes for visual stuff... it feels more organic, to me, when we're using the tech equivilent of scotch tape and aluminum foil to make something. I'm even sort of afraid to start using php because I'm nostalgic for the
.html file extension. But that's probably a bit silly...

That said, though, different tools for different purposes. I'm rediscovering flash all over again now that I'm doing video work...

-er.

DISCUSSION

namjune();paik()


http://www.one38.org/nmjnpk/

It's been brought to my attention that some of my ascii formatting is not working on macs, period, regardless of browser. Feel free to view it, but save your expectations for viewing it on a PC with firefox or ie.

Thanks,
-er.