Re: <nettime> Nettime Listening Post

[podinski via nettime-l <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org>]

Hi David et al,

Thanks for writing the extensive recap !

What i really appreciated from the face2face meetup is how it gives the
space for deep knowledge to get unpacked in a room with full-dimensional
human beings.

In such a way that big topics that come out of a dry, flat, distant text
+ web 2-dimensional soil, like dehydrated cyberspace protein tabs or
cubes, that can't be fully tasted or felt until they get watered in a
local garden. Where they can expand into ideas/ theories/perspectives
that are intermingling with actual people and transformed into a
community presence ... with past, present, and future elements... and
more visible intent and physical characteristics ... and with old, new
and unexpected collaborators.

A good reminder how this kind of a deep net community might be better
nourished and/or tweaked and/or defended and.or made more inclusive
through various *Offline* local realms. Great to hear that more meetups
are starting to sprout !

...

One thing that is missing from David's recap was an aspect raised about
the intimidation factors ( also related to the Silence themes of late ),
and the possible considerations for anonymity  and/or collective
identity postings or perhaps even entries with a right to expire ;)

There was some really sharp technical expertise in the room which
weighed in on such matters. But for me this turned the topic too much
into a technical ( and techno-political ) question, when it is also
perhaps more importantly seen as sociological, psychological, behavioral
matters ... and/or aspects related to group + power dynamics and
asymmetric relationships ...

And what i will throw out here spontaneoulsy might be a notion of "The
Sitting Duck Archives" in a world of predatory "Cloud Capital" ( nod to
Varoufakis weighing in on our grim new-ish tech-colonial relations ),
which will also relate to all the new AI feeding frenzies unfolding. 
Oddly, people here seemed a little too enthusiastic for the next wave of
data horrors ;)

And no one else there seemed willing or prepared to raise important
questions about what negatives may exist in online discourses +
communications  ( that create big permanent archives ) in especially
volatile and polarizing and techno-feudalist times ( Varoufakis again,
and so many others warning us ! ).

Of course this goes against the grain of a TRANSMEDIALE convergence that
was - not surprisingly - more assembled to frame things around what
wonderful TECHNICAL things can be done with such a historical community
archive. Some of which IS of course very cool !

But given that sad state of our cybernetic mousetraps today, it seems
equally urgent to consider how to liberate the present interminglings +
shaping of minds, and not allowing the flows of information and
communications to be tainted by a strange and unwholesome capture
obsession / possession industry, and the new priority of manifesting BIG
DATA PETRI-DISHES, no matter the risks !  Living in someone else's
Laboratory ( Antony Loewenstein comes to mind )  can absolutely have
detrimental + chilling effects, and/or various kinds of problematic
Transmutations of all those great community gardens of which i spoke of
above. Without really knowing what all the implications are.

...

This is all a little abstract... I do have more concrete examples of
what i think could protect and nurture the authentic discourse needs and
potentials, but will have to try and come back another time to be more
clear.

All the best!

Podinski


ps. Also...

Thanks Louis for illuminating some of those areas of intimidation,
pressures, etc experiences by humans in all our problematic and crunchy
environments.  very useful to bring it down into those contexts.


 


 

 

 

On 20/02/24 12:00, nettime-l-request@lists.nettime.org wrote:
> Send nettime-l mailing list submissions to
> 	nettime-l@lists.nettime.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.servus.at/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	nettime-l-request@lists.nettime.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of nettime-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Nettime Listening Post (Brian Holmes)
>    2. Nettime Listening Post (Louis Rawlins)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 07:18:36 -0600
> From: Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldrift@gmail.com>
> To: "<nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> 	collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets"
> 	<nettime-l@lists.nettime.org>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> Nettime Listening Post
> Message-ID:
> 	<CANuiTgzWu5n7byX7wjFKGwdbKNvVwPyjXm42TKjNtwaSRqVYkw@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>>> One important proposal was to invite and support a number of guest
>> editors from different demographics who might introduce new threads and
>> different voices.
>>
>> An excellent idea.
>>
>>> 6. the old boys [...] might be quietly shuffled off to some nettime
>> equivalent of ?sheltered accommodation?.
>>
> Lol, I fully support both ideas and welcome new generations to nettime!
>
> Anyone who wants to do a Midwest meetup for old boys on mute can definitely
> find me in Chicago!
>
> warmly, Brian
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:23:41 -0800
> From: Louis Rawlins <louis.rawlins@gmail.com>
> To: nettime-l@lists.nettime.org
> Subject: <nettime> Nettime Listening Post
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAEvhRak3F6ko3XR6C_0nmtm10C4nxY-5N-z15jj8XkZ0s1itcA@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Wow. Thank you to David and everybody you met, and to paul for bringing
> this post back up:
>
> Time Passed and Something Happened
>> A Brief Report from the Nettime Listening Post-
>
> I've been necessarily out-of-touch to tend to my health Even so, I do not
> consider myself a frequent contributor by any means. However, there are a
> couple of notes I wanted to tag onto, since global dialogue is why I'm
> here. (!)
>
>
> Am 19.02.24 um 03:00 schrieb paul van der walt <paul@denknerd.org> via
> nettime-l:
>
>> 5. Its surprising just how many people present declared themselves too
>> intimidated to join the on-line discussions but were articulate and
>> insightful in the meeting.
>>
>> That's a shame, but i can understand the dynamic.  I don't have better
>> suggestions at this time than to say: feel welcome to post your thoughts,
>> musings, etc.  The other mods and i intend to uphold a civil standard of
>> communications, and well, here i am saying things, i have no special
>> qualifications to do so!  It can feel intimidating for sure, but we will
>> all be enriched by hearing more/different voices!
>>
> If you're reading me and you're feeling intimidated. I feel you. It's real.
> And it can be strong.
>
> I came online in the early nineties, when I was about 14 years old. Much of
> my young life was spent moving to-and-from doctor's offices, so being
> online felt "safe" even if I didn't have much to say, at first. My
> communication with folks began with a handful of small groups where I felt
> comfortable typing and exchanging thoughts before I ever posted to the vast
> arena that is Usenet or any mailing list.
>
> Much later, as iPhones and social media loomed large, I started corporate
> work and I also began to back off with my own participation, until about
> 2014 - 2018 when I generally stopped participating online because I could
> feel a shitshow was brewing. Too many networks. Too many social demands
> from people and workplaces. I didn't want to feel under the gun to keep up
> with people and conform all the time. By that point, I'd been "captured" by
> networks like Slack, Meetup and LinkedIn as places where I sought and found
> work (aka, a way to feed myself and support my family).
>
> Around 2021, I noticed a pretty tremendous shift in my desire and
> willingness to share ideas online, even at work. That year, this post came
> out from Matt Taibbi posted an interview with Martin Gurri, who wrote the
> book "Revolt of the Public" discussion self-censorships and how states
> harness that in the everyday ? I've probably already shared it on this list:
> https://www.racket.news/p/interview-with-martin-gurri-a-short
>
> At the time I worked as a designer building pharma supply chain software.
> Within the company, we had threads and conversations happening through
> major pharmaceutical companies, Salesforce, Figma and all sorts of "name"
> brands without our company being a household name. The pressure to "keep to
> the script" and not stray from the company line became *very strong.*
>
> I do not see that sentiment or that pressure going away ? especially for
> folks working with, inside, and around technology ? any time soon. There's
> a great deal of perceived pressure with recent lay-offs that are likely to
> continue for the rest of the decade and just a general uncertainty globally
> about "who ought to own what" as our capitalist reality makes another death
> rattle and we find ourselves collectively unable to imagine a different way
> of living.
>
> I feel Brian Holmes and others have touched on this, but connection is
> important to healing. Finding new ways of living. The catch, of course, is
> that healing tends to happen in its own time.
>
> This week, I was reading a transcript about ambiguous loss with Pauline
> Boss. Krista Tippett is the interviewer.
>
> The interview was framed that we, as a global culture (whatever that
> means), have lost a great deal in terms of routine, people we love, and
> possibly even places we love, and it's difficult to put these events in
> perspective if we're always trying "close the loop" like every life event
> is a bullet item inspired by David Allen's *Getting Things Done* time
> management system.
>
> This transcript, "Navigating Loss Without Closure," has been resonating
> with everything I see lately, so my advanced apologies if it feels like
> unnecessary colorization to the comfort / intimidation felt about posting
> to the nettime mailing list:
> https://onbeing.org/programs/pauline-boss-navigating-loss-without-closure/
>
> In the transcript the, Pauline Boss is speaking about Elizabeth
> K?bler-Ross's stages of grief:
>
> "Today, the new research in grief and loss does not recommend linear
> stages. We like linear stages, though. The news media really likes it
> because, in fact, it has an ending. It has a finite end. If you start with
> stage one, and you move on through stage five, you?re done. ...
>
> Well, we now know that this is not true and that human beings live with
> grief and, in fact, are able to live with grief. They don?t have to get
> over it. They don?t obsess with it five years down the road, but they
> occasionally remember and are sad.... And this is normal. ... They?re
> grieving. This should be normalized. Sadness is treated with human
> connection."
>
> This may be common knowledge to many on the list ? or maybe not ? but I add
> it as a reminder that we can indeed keep working through things together
> and not necessarily have to arrive at a destination. When we pause, we are
> at a destination, and then we move on to the next.
>
>
>> One important proposal was to invite and support a number of guest
>> editors from different demographics who might introduce new threads and
>> different voices.
>>
>> An excellent idea.
>>
> I'd like to suggest we also consider *geographics.*
>
> Where folks are from is definitely part of the story, but I feel like I'm
> missing a ton of on-the-ground stories that are made
> that-much-more-interesting when filtered through the demographic lens of
> natives / expats / nomads.
>
>
>
>>> 6. the old boys [...] might be quietly shuffled off to some nettime
>> equivalent of ?sheltered accommodation?.
>>
>> Haha!  I'm all about lawn bowls in the sun, sign me up!  Although i likely
>> haven't earned my spot aboard that particular bus by a long shot yet ?
>>
> Adding the full quote, because I think it's hilarious and well-founded:
>
> Am 15.02.24 um 17:39 schrieb David Garcia <
>> d.garcia@new-tactical-research.co.uk> via nettime-l:
>> 6.      A number of the women present got stuck in to addressing the
>> question
>> of limited inclusivity head on and events took a humorous turn by
>> suggesting that the old boys (some of whom they were quite fond of)
>> might be quietly shuffled off to some nettime equivalent of ?sheltered
>> accommodation?.
>
> I'm curious these days, what elder-ship looks like.
>
> It's become clear to me that in the rush to retire and house people as they
> age, we're cutting ourselves off from a rich history. This is not a
> criticism to the suggestion, but rather a request to widen the dialogue. I
> know we have a pretty broad tapestry of old heads on nettime, so maybe
> there are thoughts on what's expected in terms of contribution. Anarchic
> democracy feels difficult in that regard, but hey.
>
>
>> 10. Speaking of ?Tactical Archives? we were keen to discuss how better
>> use could be made of the extensive and rich nettime archive. And in that
>> regard we were joined on-line by Michael Dieter, Mark Tuters and David
>> Gauthier all three researchers had written a significant journal article on
>> the importance of mailing lists based on dialogues with list editors at the
>> time including Melinda Rackham for empyre and Andreas Broeckmann for
>> Spectre... Their declared aim is ?to both introduce these lists to the
>> emerging field of internet history and scope out medium-specific methods
>> that take the measure of concepts, discourses, cohorts, and events that
>> have taken place through them over time.? (quote from the abstract)
>>
>> That's of particular interest to me.  I'd be interested to learn more
>> about what experts could/would do with such rich and longitudinal archives
>> indeed.  If nothing else my personal commitment as long as i am involved
>> here is to ensure safekeeping of the existing archives as they are (both
>> raw and processed to HTML for presentation).  This reminds me that i should
>> follow up with Ted about gathering some supplementary files from 2001...
>> But yes, keen to think about new/engaging ways of presenting the historical
>> threads.  I don't doubt that there could be a lot of cool things one could
>> do to present them or draw insights, make them navigable, etc.!
>>
> This may not be the appropriate place, but does anyone have any idea about
> formatting on nettime these days? I'm unclear if it's was "always like
> this" (<-- those a double-quote marks) but I recently saw a post
> about Y?gen (<-- that's a bar over the lowercase "u") and wondered if we
> maybe aren't doing ourselves a long-term disservice by restricting the
> character set we are storing on the list.
>
> (It may be my service filtering it, but I'm just rocking GMail with nothing
> fancy.)
>
>
> Am 15.02.24 um 17:39 schrieb David Garcia <
>> d.garcia@new-tactical-research.co.uk> via nettime-l:
>> 13.     I was worried that in setting aside 3 hours for the meeting we were
>> biting off more that we could chew. I needn't have worried the
>> conversation never flagged. And like all the best meetings ?time passed
>> and something happened.? See you in Amsterdam.
>
> Super exciting! :D
>
> Thank you again David and everybody who got to be a part.
>
> Peace,  Louis
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
-- 
# 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: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org