is art utility? is art political? is code art?

On 06/03/2014 11:41 PM, Josh Walker wrote:
> Tech is always neutral. It's an inanimate object. It's as neutral as
> trees or roads or balls of string.
>
> People use tech, and without people, tech does nothing. People are never
> completely neutral. Therein lies the paradox. But tech cannot feel or
> think or act. (Let's ignore the looming issue of strong AI for now.)
>
> But yes, tech alone is just "lights, and clockwork."
>
> On Jun 3, 2014, at 15:52, Marvin Fernandes <marvin@???
> <mailto:marvin@hardopdenken.nl>> wrote:
>
>> Will tech be neutral if you take "affordance" in de equation?
>> Some tech makes more bad them Good possible.
>>
>>
>> Middelerwijl een schoon wees
>> gegroet,
>> Marvin Fernandes
>> 0624559753
>>
>>
>> Verstuurd vanaf mijn Sinclair Spectrum
>>
>> Op 31 mei 2014 om 07:03 heeft Josh Walker <josh@???
>> <mailto:josh@thinkfenix.com>> het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> While I'd agree we shouldn't even BE over in the sand, I don't see
>>> evil on the forehead of the guy who founded PayPal with Elon Musk and
>>> the rest, and did whatever Palantir does which seemingly includes
>>> detecting IEDs.
>>>
>>> Some of you guys lean a *lot* more toward what I'd call AnCom. I'm
>>> pretty squarely an AnCapper. The guys who build the A-bomb aren't
>>> responsible for its misuse. Tech is tech. If bad shit happens with
>>> Palantir tech without Thiel's approval or knowledge, it's not Thiel
>>> I'm coming for. He's only responsible for his actions, and to the
>>> degree he can estimate the future, his lack of action as well.
>>>
>>> The balance of where that lies―how much of the future can one be
>>> reasonably expected to foresee―is indeed the sticking point. Should
>>> the A-bomb have never been made, because of that? It seems that it
>>> would be made sooner or later anyway; and, there are innumerable
>>> legitimate and beneficial uses for the tech too.
>>>
>>> I'd be curious to know what your take on the plot of Iron Man was.
>>> And if you liked the message, I'd recommend you contemplate where you
>>> fit on the Anarchist spectrum, and whether you're consistent about
>>> your values.
>>>
>>> If guns and gun manufacturers are neutral, and all the other stuff we
>>> generally believe around these parts, I don't see how you can say
>>> Palantir itself is anything but neutral without being hypocritical.
>>> The other side says the same shit about Cody making 3D-printable
>>> guns. Either individuals are responsible and tech is neutral, or not,
>>> but you've got to pick one.
>>>
>>> ―J
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On May 30, 2014, at 22:02, Kristov Atlas
>>>> <author@???
>>>> <mailto:author@anonymousbitcoinbook.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Officially incorporated in May 2003, Palantir is generally
>>>> considered to have been founded in 2004 by Peter Thiel
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel>, Alex Karp, Joe Lonsdale
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lonsdale>,^<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies#cite_note-4>
>>>> Stephen Cohen
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Cohen_%28entrepreneur%29>, and
>>>> Nathan Gettings. Early investments were $2 million from the US
>>>> Central Intelligence Agency
>>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency> venture
>>>> arm In-Q-Tel <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel>, and $30
>>>> million from Thiel and his firm, Founders Fund <http://en.wikiped
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>