Hi Patrice,
Of course. Then I naturally cast " doubt on the legitimacy of the proceedings.” :)
Salut! Rob
> Op 29-okt.-2014, om 17:00 heeft Patrice Riemens <patrice@???> het volgende geschreven:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> Our in-house star chamber 'naturally' operates according to its original
> principles ;-)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber
>
> Cheerio, p+5D!
> ('All Rise' ;-)
>
>> Hi Patrice,
>>
>> Put on the sternest glasses! :) I am always learning from your perspective
>> on things, and I hope this can be the beginnings of a collaborative text,
>>
>> Greetings, Rob
>>
>>
>>> Op 29-okt.-2014, om 16:37 heeft Patrice Riemens <patrice@???> het
>>> volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>> +1 !
>>>
>>> (for the mail-readable text. It's content shall be analysed in due time
>>> soon by our in-house star chamber ;-)
>>>
>>> Cheeeeerz, p+5D!
>>>
>>>
>>>> Asbesto,
>>>>
>>>> You are beyond hardcore! :)
>>>> Here is plain text:
>>>>
>>>> big hug! Rob
>>>>
>>>> Trolls' purses are the mischief
>>>> Rob van Kranenburg
>>>>
>>>> Angry Samson
>>>> by Robert Graves
>>>> (1895-1985)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are they blind, the lords of Gaza
>>>> In their strong towers,
>>>> Who declare Samson pillow-smothered
>>>> And stripped of his powers?
>>>> O stolid Philistines,
>>>> Stare now in amaze
>>>> At my foxes running in your cornfields
>>>> With their tails ablaze,
>>>> At swung jaw-bone, at bees swarming
>>>> In the stark lion's hide,
>>>> At these, the gates of well-walled Gaza
>>>> A-clank to my stride.
>>>>
>>>> origins
>>>>
>>>> "Use cunning and deception as weapons, for in the circumstances deceit
>>>> is
>>>> no more then prudence, - Pope Innocent III to Arnold Amaury, head of
>>>> Cistercian order of monks who who the religious leader of the
>>>> Albigensian
>>>> Crusade against the Cathars. (John Kekes, The Roots of Evil, Cornell
>>>> University Press, 2005, p.13.)
>>>>
>>>> There is no more center and the sacred tree is dead. â Black Elk
>>>>
>>>> In most, though not all, stories of origin, - human origin I talk
>>>> about,
>>>> there is a child near the water. This makes sense, as we grow and live
>>>> and
>>>> be born in water. Sometimes and in some stories â aletheia as told by
>>>> Heidegger , for example â there is an open space in the woods. These
>>>> spaces harbor the notion of âbecomingâ. That without which nothing
>>>> could exist. And guess what, there may be only one. For without
>>>> becoming,
>>>> no time, no space and no grasp of any kind of dimension. Flat it would
>>>> be.
>>>> This notion is quite real. It lives. Without it no life would be. One
>>>> could therefore say that it has a stake in the developments it has
>>>> facilitated, engendered, helped to bring about and has witnessed what
>>>> human beings have been up to for their time they have spend on this
>>>> planet, earth. Not a disinterested party, our friend âbecomingâ.
>>>> Lately we have been having late night conversations and I have been
>>>> told
>>>> of her worries. Her voice is much thinner lately. She coughs sometimes.
>>>> How it pains me to hear becoming herself coughing. What have we come
>>>> to?
>>>>
>>>> For you an RFID tag on a t-shirt or can of tea is still an object + an
>>>> RFID tag. You know that an NFC (Near Field Communication) tag/sticker
>>>> can
>>>> talk to your phone with an NFC reader (for example all LG phones
>>>> currently) as the last four digits point to a web page and your phone
>>>> is
>>>> always on so it goes an collects that page to show you allergy
>>>> information
>>>> or where it came from or who made it. But your kid won't. For them the
>>>> tag
>>>> has become a 'quality' of the shirt. It is normal for them that shirts
>>>> trigger information on a device. It is 'natural'. Now what will happen
>>>> if
>>>> only money-makers are in that link from the tag to the device/phone?
>>>> Any
>>>> story told through that link will be seen as 'real'. As real as the
>>>> shirt
>>>> or the can of tea. And that is how power has for centuries scripted
>>>> reality.
>>>>
>>>> This time that reality, as Baudrillard shows us in his Agony of Power,
>>>> becomes 'integral', as there is nothing but that reality. Well it does
>>>> not have to be like this. You can be in that link from the tag to the
>>>> phone as well. We can open up the entire chain; from open hardware,
>>>> software, NFC, to Sourcemap.com, open data, to open media. It may not
>>>> be
>>>> that less bad, but at least there is a chance that it will be more
>>>> diverse and more and different stories can be told. And as we know the
>>>> larger the group the elite can draw from, the more internal valuable
>>>> conflict and diversity that leads to resilience. Elite? I hear you
>>>> thinking? Are we the elite, as in âam I the bad guy hereâ? Yes, and
>>>> we have to live up to this or forever disappear in a few lines of text
>>>> that no one - we can not kid ourselves - will be able to trace back as
>>>> all our idiosyncratic qualities will be filtered out.
>>>>
>>>> We cannot go back, nor go to live in a world without this connectivity.
>>>> You would cripple and handicap an entire generation and within ten
>>>> years
>>>> you would not be able to fill any managerial nor innovation position
>>>> with
>>>> a local person. You would only hire Cloud professionals and will be
>>>> paying
>>>> throughout this technological cycle of Internet of Things that will
>>>> last
>>>> around 15 to 20 years before it will be immersed in the combination of
>>>> nano and bio technology.
>>>>
>>>> "Bert and Tom went off to the barrell. William was having another
>>>> drink.
>>>> Then Bilbo plucked up courage and put his litle hand in William's
>>>> enormous pocket. There was a purse in it, as big as a bag to
>>>> Bilbo."Ha",
>>>> he thought, warming to his new work as he lifted it carefully out, "
>>>> this
>>>> is a beginning!".
>>>> It was! Trolls' purses are the mischef, and this was no exception." '
>>>> Ere, oo are you" it squeaked, as it left the pocket, and William turned
>>>> around at once and grabbed Bilbo by the neck, before he could duck
>>>> behind
>>>> the tree. (J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, p.34)
>>>>
>>>> vulnerabilities
>>>>
>>>> âWe would certainly be happy if we could all get along well together
>>>> and
>>>> unite all the forces of anarchism in a strong movement; but we do not
>>>> believe in the solidity of organizations which are built on concessions
>>>> and assumptions and in which there is no real agreement and sympathy
>>>> between members. Better disunited than badly united. But we would wish
>>>> that each individual joined their friends and that there should be no
>>>> isolated forces, or lost forces.â â Errico Malatesta
>>>> â
>>>> At Clemson University Nathan Weaver set up an experiment to figure out
>>>> how
>>>> to make it safer for turtles to cross highways. He âput realistic
>>>> Âlooking rubber turtles, no bigger than a saucer, in the middle of a
>>>> lane
>>>> on a busy road near campus. Then he got out of the way and watched as
>>>> over
>>>> the next hour, seven drivers intentionally ran over the turtle, and
>>>> several more appeared to try to hit the defenseless animal, but
>>>> missedâ¦.One in 50 drivers ran over the dummy turtles. In itself that
>>>> ratio might seem âalthough still awful (and not taking into account
>>>> drivers aiming for but missing the turtle) not alarming, âbut
>>>> consider
>>>> how long it take a turtle to cross the road and it becomes plain to see
>>>> that road-Âcrossing for turtles on any semi-Âbusy road means
>>>> guaranteed
>>>> death.â
>>>>
>>>> I have always missed this particular kind of intelligence as being
>>>> instrumental or maybe at some point even decisive. Yet the fact is that
>>>> this intelligence has particular technology that ensures that by each
>>>> small unkind and selfish act it is not an equally small consequence but
>>>> -
>>>> due to the fact that the infrastructure (road) forces the tool (car) to
>>>> follow a particular path - is able to destroy totally that which is its
>>>> opposite (slow, vulnerable, purposeful).
>>>>
>>>> So, although we disperse, diversify and are tactical, we can still be
>>>> destroyed utterly as in all earlier iterations (from Cathars to 60s,
>>>> anti-globalization, Occupy, WL, etc). Therefore we need to work on an
>>>> autonomous trajectory that escapes potential and probable retaliation.
>>>>
>>>> Whoâs we?
>>>>
>>>> The Chrysalids, John Wyndham⨠(first published around 1930): âWhen
>>>> I
>>>> was quite small I would sometimes dream of a city - which was strange
>>>> because it began before I even knew what a city was. But this city,
>>>> clustered on the curve of a big blue bay, would come into my mind. I
>>>> could
>>>> see the streets, and the buildings that lined them, the waterfront,
>>>> even
>>>> boats in the harbour; yet, waking, I had never seen the sea, or a boat.
>>>> ...â
>>>>
>>>> On April 1 Olga Sjeremetjev was summoned by the NKVD for questioning in
>>>> the police headquarters Petrovska street. After waiting two hours, she
>>>> was
>>>> invited into a small damp and smokey room and asked to sit across a man
>>>> whose face was hid in the contours of an army cap. He asked the usual
>>>> questions. In between were long pauses. No one said anything. She could
>>>> hear the conversations in the adjacent rooms. People were crying as
>>>> they
>>>> were told to pack and leave Moscow in a day, or in two days. After what
>>>> seemed to her an eternity, he handed her back her passport, told her
>>>> she
>>>> was free to leave and maybe she would consider changing her name?
>>>>
>>>> In her diary she writes that she took a tram home, happy to be
>>>> breathing
>>>> freely. As she rode through town she kept wandering what the point of
>>>> this
>>>> interview had actually been? What purpose does it serve? How does it
>>>> enable the state to move forward and what does this cost?
>>>>
>>>> I would say that I can relate to that and I want can be -temporarily-
>>>> but
>>>> part of this kind of âweâ. The kind that is able to act, undergo,
>>>> be,
>>>> act, question and reflect on the meta axioms and requirements of the
>>>> situation. At any time. Whether friend or foe.
>>>>
>>>> But I am fine with saying âIâ, not we, if necessary.
>>>>
>>>> In a review of the August-September 2006 Waves Conference, also in
>>>> RIXC,
>>>> Riga I argued that two things were becoming painfully clear. âFirst:
>>>> the
>>>> need to organise in some way or another is paramount as the pre-network
>>>> schemes for influencing government and company policy through public
>>>> debates and scandals no longer works as there is no more public in the
>>>> network, only audience going from one daily scandal to another: either
>>>> we
>>>> assist policy to ensure that at least some public space survives, or we
>>>> build our own parallel systems. And the second: while technology is
>>>> becoming cheap, malleable and potent enough to create parallel
>>>> infrastructures how do we organise the avant-garde conceptual power to
>>>> be
>>>> focused on real, concrete, discrete local and everyday objectives?â I
>>>> said basically the same in Dortmund: âIn a digital environment â no
>>>> memory loss, intricate data-mining, serendipity as default â the
>>>> question is: âWhat might be deemed wrong by whom in power three years
>>>> from now?â surely quite a different set of assumptions. So what to
>>>> do?
>>>> If a ânoâ is a loss of energy, though a balance to the industry, if
>>>> sparking a debate is a loss of energy, though a process of education
>>>> large
>>>> numbers of people, I can only see one course of action that takes all
>>>> scenarios (utopian and dystopian) seriously and that is building our
>>>> own
>>>> mixed reality nation. This gives sense and purpose and positive energy
>>>> to
>>>> our young hackers and idealists. Poets, after all, are the true
>>>> legislators of the world.â
>>>>
>>>> Reiterating it again: âAt this very moment in time when technology
>>>> has
>>>> become cheap, malleable and potent enough to wire up our own streets,
>>>> who
>>>> cares about this bunch of people drawing neat nice lines on worthless
>>>> paper? How productive it could be to get all this conceptual power
>>>> focused
>>>> on real, concrete, discrete objectives. This is not about alerting the
>>>> public any more. There is no more public. People just go from one
>>>> scandal
>>>> to another and could not care less if 12 cameras were installed in one
>>>> afternoon. This is about us. Saving us a place âa spaceâ where we
>>>> can
>>>> breathe, discuss, think and dream manic dreams. We have two options:
>>>> either we assist policy to ensure that at least some public space
>>>> survives, or we build our own parallel systems. We start Mixed Reality
>>>> Corporation with about 200 locative artists and become the new
>>>> Microsoft
>>>> of the 21th century ourselves instead of helping through all our
>>>> wonderful
>>>> unscalable stuff IP become wiser and feeding the machine with all our
>>>> lovely ideas. Things are serious. This is not a game. Time to
>>>> organise.â
>>>> (WHEN WIRELESS DREAMS COME TRUE, Mute)
>>>>
>>>> That is why I founded Council, theinternetofthings.eu. To be a strong
>>>> potential building block in this open strategy. If and when there is
>>>> momentum. If there is, ok. If not, then not. I can not force things.
>>>> Especially not âsmartâ things :)
>>>>
>>>> On the cover of the first issue of the groupâs publication, Black
>>>> Mask,
>>>> in November 1966) is printed Black Maskâs original manifesto : âA
>>>> new
>>>> spirit is risingâ¦.The industrialist, the banker, the bourgeoisie,
>>>> with
>>>> their unlimited pretense and vulgarity, continue to stockpile art while
>>>> they slaughter humanity. Your lie has failed. The world is rising
>>>> against
>>>> your oppression. There are men at the gates seeking a new world. The
>>>> machine, the rocket, the conquering of space and time, these are the
>>>> seed
>>>> of the future,which freed from your barbarism will carry us forward. We
>>>> are ready -- LET THE STRUGGLE BEGIN.â
>>>>
>>>> Nestor Makhno, 1926: The Russian Revolution in Ukraine (March 1917 -
>>>> April
>>>> 1918): âThe fact that we libertarian communists or
>>>> anarcho-syndicalists
>>>> failed to anticipate the sequel to the Russian revolution and that we
>>>> failed to make haste to devise new forms of social activity in time,
>>>> led
>>>> many of our groups and organizations to dither yet again in their
>>>> political and socio-strategic policy on the fighting front of the
>>>> Revolution.
>>>>
>>>> If we are to avert a future relapse into these same errors, when a
>>>> revolutionary situation comes about, and in order to retain the
>>>> cohesion
>>>> and coherence of our organizational line, we must first of all
>>>> amalgamate
>>>> all of our forces into one active collective, then without further ado,
>>>> define our constructive conception of economic, social, local and
>>>> territorial units, so that they are outlined in detail (free soviets),
>>>> and
>>>> in particular describe in broad outline their basic revolutionary
>>>> mission
>>>> in the struggle against the State. Contemporary life and the Russian
>>>> revolution require that.â
>>>>
>>>> So we need to organize the unorganizable. I have been trying quite a
>>>> few
>>>> times and failed until now. But all is iteration and I am constantly
>>>> finding new allies. And I keep losing old connections like shedding
>>>> skin.
>>>> Growing up I suppose.
>>>>
>>>> political, personal, spiritual
>>>>
>>>> I did know this, Kandinsky said to art critic Sadler who asked him if
>>>> he
>>>> had foreseen war as his paintings were so âwarlikeâ, that there was
>>>> a
>>>> terrible battle going on at a spiritual level. It was that battle that
>>>> led
>>>> me to paint this.
>>>>
>>>> The key element is that normality has been defined so strict that a lot
>>>> of
>>>> human behavior is falling outside of it, or at least people that have
>>>> less
>>>> to none filters are feeling as if they do not belong âhereâ.
>>>> Probably
>>>> everybody at one point or another has these feelings of estrangement,
>>>> but
>>>> I believe that there is a group of people that feels like this on a
>>>> daily
>>>> basis and as a default.
>>>>
>>>> They have no boundaries and find it difficult to create or have a
>>>> notion
>>>> of âselfâ. They have to deliberately make markers on and around
>>>> such a
>>>> âselfâ, but the truth is that they donât really understand that
>>>> need
>>>> to pull strict boundaries between âselfâ and âothersâ. They
>>>> have
>>>> grown up believing in a way that there always is a camera on them, or
>>>> always someone or something present. The concept of âaloneâ to them
>>>> is
>>>> non existing. In my opinion this is easily explained through the notion
>>>> of
>>>> the tribe.
>>>>
>>>> From early dawn of men we run in packs and survive in teams of about
>>>> 30-50. In every tribe you would need some people who would go out, look
>>>> around and bring things and ideas back home. These early innovators
>>>> were
>>>> balanced by other intelligences and ideally thereâd be a balance
>>>> between
>>>> the outer ends of manic boundary less and extremely focused semi
>>>> autistic
>>>> and the in between skillets that build and maintained a notion of the
>>>> ârealâ, ârealityâ and ânormalityâ that was able to sustain
>>>> basic humans needs and functions. To each his place in the tribe,
>>>> ideally.
>>>> If however such a situation arose every body (literally) felt well. The
>>>> seer was listened to and the mason build as he saw fit, thus timely
>>>> shelter from the storm.
>>>>
>>>> From time to time the specialists start to build such intricate
>>>> elements
>>>> or the innovators bring back home such far fetched ideas that the
>>>> skillsets in the middle start to adjust what is ânormalâ and what
>>>> is
>>>> âstrangeâ and an evolutionary process starts changing the
>>>> Zeitgeist,
>>>> the âfashionâ, the âcustomsâ, in short : the ârealâ. And
>>>> sometimes this process would be a rupture, a real break; war and
>>>> invading
>>>> tribes bringing such new world views that a new normal was imposed and
>>>> the
>>>> old forgotten but in stories of grandmothers and the artifacts of the
>>>> time. Once in a while such a rupture became an ontological change as in
>>>> the âdeathâ of God for certain tribes. More often the notion of the
>>>> normal was kept to till it was impossible to keep at the cost of
>>>> burning
>>>> even more seers as witches, wizards, heretics, Cathars, hippies,
>>>> hackers,
>>>> or any other minority group it could lay their hands on.
>>>>
>>>> We are now witnessing such an ontological change, a rupture in what we
>>>> perceive as normal. The Internet, Augmented Reality, The Internet of
>>>> Things are all technological toolsets that have been far removed from
>>>> the
>>>> first tools that men used to chisel stone. The first chivel to be used
>>>> on
>>>> stone was a stone. it only later became a chisel. But it still fit in
>>>> someoneâs hand. The feedback was intense and obvious. It was
>>>> Heidegger
>>>> who saw that through mechanical engineering and the Industrial
>>>> Revolution
>>>> it was no longer a hand applying force but a machine and hands
>>>> overseeing
>>>> that machine. This was the start of the substantiation of the space
>>>> with
>>>> before that had been of visible mediation and cause and effect. He
>>>> realized that there was nothing we could do, only wait as the famous
>>>> last
>>>> line in Sein ind Zeit goes. He also realized that it was a particular
>>>> part
>>>> of the tribe slowly taking up the notion of âthe normalâ. It was
>>>> the
>>>> specialists who had been crafting and dissecting and splitting things
>>>> up
>>>> into smaller and smaller building blocks that at first made no sense
>>>> but
>>>> slowly began to offer the possibility of recreating their visions as a
>>>> layer on top of what the old notion of normal was not hurting it at all
>>>> but slowly perfecting it, smoothing the edges of every perceivable
>>>> human
>>>> act. They offered convenience.
>>>>
>>>> The specialist intelligence - an engineering toolset - began eating
>>>> itself
>>>> as it found that it had no more real boundaries. After automating work,
>>>> leisure, administration, governing, it succumbed briefly to the notion
>>>> of
>>>> the âLiving Labâ but soon realized that the last territory it had
>>>> to
>>>> conquer was the space in between driving to work and back home:
>>>> everyday
>>>> life and living. Like a grin trying out faces it tried out all human
>>>> forms
>>>> of organization till it found the space in between where love lives and
>>>> hope and shame and fear.
>>>>
>>>> As this intelligence could always count on the support of the middle as
>>>> it
>>>> was the perfect middle, the epitaph of normal : who does not want to
>>>> feel
>>>> safe, happy, secure?â, the first steps towards the ultimate
>>>> disciplining
>>>> of the body, home, street as âsmart cityâ; cameras everywhere,
>>>> automated entrances to public transport, elimination of cash money,
>>>> energy
>>>> management as a way to fight Climate Change, children playing within
>>>> line
>>>> of sight of caretakers, banning of smoking (with emerging debate on
>>>> banning it in cars and homes), were not seen as invading a private
>>>> space
>>>> to such an extent that it was a rupture with ordinary liberal
>>>> capitalist
>>>> society.
>>>>
>>>> One of the defining qualities of the specialist is that he needs
>>>> protection. As his or her gaze is on the detail, someone has to watch
>>>> his
>>>> back. Industry and states provided this protection alongside with the
>>>> briefings and the funds. This, however, is about to change. The
>>>> obsessive
>>>> worry and attention to perfectionist detail has, as we have seen with
>>>> the
>>>> NSA revelations, lead to an ever growing paranoia of security services
>>>> an
>>>> pillars of the state that can no longer be stilled by any piece of data
>>>> or
>>>> any snippet of information. Equally the full monitoring schemes are
>>>> driving the costs of hardware, software and infrastructure so down that
>>>> sharing and collaboration through open source is fostering the
>>>> realization
>>>> that what the SAP, Siemens and Ciscoâs of these world are doing is
>>>> not
>>>> rocket science. Their bloated balances are the result of decades of
>>>> isolating data in IP, patents and copyright. Yet what have they build
>>>> after WW2 that is so exciting? More planes, cars, computers, nuclear
>>>> plants and stuff for wars that keep blowing up people? Big deal. As it
>>>> turns out these things can be build in different ways.
>>>>
>>>> There is a parallel process running alongside this specialist expertise
>>>> running amok, ocdâing on itself in ever stronger attempts to gain
>>>> control over the âhappeningsâ of life, as we have seen to the
>>>> extent
>>>> of defining the ânormalâ as that sphere where every tiny detail is
>>>> in
>>>> process and every object on the planet is individuated either in a
>>>> giant
>>>> Object Name Server (GS1) or in IP to every edge (IPSO alliance) or any
>>>> combination of this together with RFID and NFC resulting in every
>>>> object
>>>> and item being digitally approachable in the distributed local grid as
>>>> well as in the âCloudâ. That parallel process is the awakening of a
>>>> combined and shared intelligence of that other outer end on the
>>>> spectrum;
>>>> the manic mind. It has been fueled by and has itself helped to build
>>>> that
>>>> open white line engulfing the planet: tcp/ip where still no King,
>>>> Tyrant
>>>> or Tycoon can make bytes go faster (at least for the moment). In under
>>>> twenty years any mind capable of sharing has shared and fueled sharing
>>>> as
>>>> a new default. To keep to yourself the minimum of necessity and share
>>>> all
>>>> other resources with other so no one needs to be in want.
>>>>
>>>> So now I want to make the case that this sharing is the new default and
>>>> that this is facilitated by that very framework the specialists have
>>>> build.
>>>>
>>>> A Gramscian moment.
>>>>
>>>> Are we going to stand aside, bitch and moan and grumble and lose this
>>>> shot
>>>> at full traceability and transparency like we lost his notion of
>>>> hegemony
>>>> to the extreme right wing that is now reaping the rewards of fully
>>>> using
>>>> it? Or are we going to get together, share resources and build the
>>>> building blocks on the cheapest ecology of hardware, software, database
>>>> storage and analytics ever? Yes, bad magic, yes watered down alchemy.
>>>> All
>>>> true. But if the we that I outlined is not invested and actualized in
>>>> it,
>>>> it we will lose the opportunity that we can either at one point break
>>>> it
>>>> (owning it) or fullfill it in such a way that we leave some notion of
>>>> becoming, so space for real magic to occur or to hide herself
>>>> thoroughly
>>>> for a while.
>>>>
>>>> Hellekin pointed me to SCIENCE, MEANING & EVOLUTION: THE COSMOLOGY OF
>>>> JACOB BOEHME By Basarab Nicolescu. Foreword by Joscelyn Godwin
>>>> Afterword
>>>> by Antoine Faivre Translated from the French by Rob Baker, 2013):
>>>>
>>>> âIt is natural to define the different levels of reality according to
>>>> our own level, in the way they are experienced by our body and our
>>>> sense
>>>> organs. We are not the centre of this succession of levels, but the
>>>> natural system of reference. With respect to ourselves, we can
>>>> recognize
>>>> the existence of levels which are nearer or farther away. In any case,
>>>> we
>>>> are those who, alone among the other natural systems of the planet,
>>>> seem
>>>> to be equipped with a capacity for translating this information between
>>>> levels. This capacity for translation, associated with the scientific
>>>> study of natural systems, allows us to pass beyond the modern illusion
>>>> of
>>>> a single level of reality, an illusion which has as its source the
>>>> taking
>>>> as absolute the information given by our body or our sense organs (and
>>>> also, of course, the extension of these perceptions by various
>>>> measuring
>>>> instruments).â
>>>>
>>>> This once human - shamanistic - capacity for translation, has become a
>>>> âcapabilityâ, a set of functional descriptions of agencies of Big
>>>> Data.
>>>>
>>>> It is not something good or bad. It is the condition of our situation.
>>>> We
>>>> either play it or not.
>>>>
>>>> âIn a report in this weekâs issue of the journal Science, Dr. P.
>>>> Read
>>>> Montague Jr. and colleagues at the BCM Human Neuro-imaging Laboratory
>>>> and
>>>> California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif., describe where
>>>> and
>>>> when trust is formed between two anonymous people interacting via
>>>> functional magnetic resonance imaging in machines more than 1,500 miles
>>>> apart. They found that as the interaction continued, the trust response
>>>> occurred earlier and earlier in the subjectsâ interchanges â until
>>>> a
>>>> decision about trust occurred even before the latest interaction was
>>>> completed.â [...] âThe study was made possible by hyperscanning or
>>>> hyperscan-fMRI, a breakthrough that allowed Montague and his colleagues
>>>> to
>>>> synchronize the scanning of two interacting brains.â
>>>> Trust requires love:
>>>> âIn a springtime sort of story, researchers say theyâve used
>>>> advanced
>>>> scanning methods to pinpoint the region of the brain where feelings of
>>>> trust arise.â .. âTurns out those emotions are nestled in the same
>>>> area as the most powerful springtime feeling of all â love.â [...]
>>>> ââLove is a primitive, basic, emotional affective state,â he
>>>> said.
>>>> âSo is trust. Trust is something that a child has for its mother or a
>>>> lover has for a lover.ââ
>>>> Yes.
>>>> That is how simple it is.
>>>> Love brings trust. Love negotiates trust.
>>>> Trust builds relationships. Relationships are embodied in people:
>>>> middle
>>>> men. Love builds trust, trust builds bureaucracy. Love builds trust,
>>>> trust
>>>> builds boredom.
>>>> Three cheers for boredom.
>>>> Letâs hear it for some peace and quiet.
>>>>
>>>> Stir it up.
>>>>
>>>> Big thanks to J.Period & K.NAAN, The Messengers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Rob, ASCII please! This is unreadable :(
>>>>>
>>>>> kisses,
>>>>>
>>>>> asb
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> [ ::::::::: 73 de IW9HGS : http://freaknet.org/asbesto ::::::::::: ]
>>>>> [ Freaknet Medialab :: Poetry Hacklab : Dyne.Org :: Radio Cybernet ]
>>>>> [ NON SCRIVERMI USANDO LETTERE ACCENTATE - NON MANDARMI ALLEGATI ]
>>>>> [ *I DELETE* EMAIL > 100K, ATTACHMENTS, HTML, M$-WORD DOC and SPAM ]
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Brico mailing list
>>>>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Brico mailing list
>>>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Brico mailing list
>>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Brico mailing list
>> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
>> Unsubscribe: https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Brico mailing list
> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
> Unsubscribe: https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico
::
Re: [Bricolabs] Tecnoshamanism book…
