mynameisdanielshinbaum

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

german/english side-by-side

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

Flusser, Die Schrift CD emulator site

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

Side-channels are similar to affect in the sense that they are surplus over information/significiaton

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

The crypto community thought it was insane when Andre Cronje memes were popping off and selling for $1000s. Wait until it’s a Taylor Swift post. Or a Kylie Jenner image. Or a Virgil Abloh design. That is going to have a similarly cosmic feeling to when Jamie Dimon conceded to BTC or when Paypal decided to support ETH. To ignore this is not be excited about the bull runs to come.

Creative Composability, Zora 

why do liberal silicon valley-type projects imagine that their “breakthrough moment” will come when a celebrity endorses their work? the breakthrough only comes gradually after an infrastructure is built, and the celebrity recognition is the last step. it can’t drive innovation--can it?

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

But luckily there's a fourth thesis as well, a final thesis that mollifies the admittedly very real dangers that surround any universal claim. Chu doesn't state the fourth thesis explicitly, but furnishes enough material for us to fill it in ourselves: (4) the universal female means we all inhabit an ethical community. If femaleness means a kind of mutual entanglement of desire, and if femaleness is universal, then everyone's desire is perpetually interwoven with other people. Your desire is not your own. Your desire always mirrors through another's. And while such a configuration might generate pathologized subject positions (female as negation), it also generates -- if you'll pardon the grandiosity -- a kind of universal ethical fabric. Negation here is a feature not a bug. Chu's structuralist universal is thus a "universal from below," since it generalizes from the subordinate position. (Theorists like Badiou and Laruelle refer to this not as "gender" but as "generic.") ... The claim "everyone is female" is thus more an ethical claim than a political one

Alexander Galloway, review of Females http://cultureandcommunication.org/galloway/females

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

“Sometimes there’s a ten-slide text-blocked Canva slideshow that feels suspicious not to share, despite any reservations one might have about its content and lack of truly traceable sourcing. No matter: that’s a reactionary mindset that privileges expertise gained in an unequal society.”

even progressives are prone to distrust mainstream institutions and expertise.

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

Just 24 hours after the mosque attacks, Monster explained on Gab that he shared the manifesto and video file onto IPFS, or the “Interplanetary File System,” a decentralized peer-to-peer file sharing network. Files on IPFS are split into many pieces, each distributed among many participants on the network, making the removal of a file nearly impossible. IPFS had previously been a niche technology, relatively unknown even among extremists. Now, calling IPFS a “crazy clever technology” that makes files “effectively uncensorable,” Monster reassured Gab users that he was also developing software to make IPFS “easy for anyone … with no technical skills required.”

Megan Squire, “Why the next terror manifesto could be even harder to track”

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

The Anti-Capitalist Software License seems like a response to the way Big Tech has incorporated and capitalized on streaming, participatory media, and open access. Perhaps Creative Commons/copyleft was once an obstacle to capitalism, but that's no longer the case today.

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

alien language generator

I couldn’t resist … I’ve added a few more tweaks to it!

‘interactive’ version and updated/streamlined code over on CodePen

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

Lone Light 1/5

Artwork by Quentin Deronzier

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

“The shift from reading to eating marked a sort of evolutionary relapse from vision to digestion: Loftus was, of course, stuffing the book in the wrong hole. What small percentage of print matter could be broken down by her intestinal system was being absorbed, uncomprehendingly, into her body; whatever remained was, of course, expelled as waste. A week or two into the project, Loftus called poison control to double check that eating Infinite Jest wouldn’t kill her: “They were sort of like ‘we can’t sanction you doing this’ but there’s a way to do it. I couldn’t be doing it too often, like I wanted to do a page a day but that’s just not feasible to do that and stay alive.”

Excerpt From

Females

Andrea Long Chu

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

EVOL vimeo? or mark fell? idk

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

The stower can only stow as fast as the buffer can buff, and the buffer can only buff as fast as unloaders unload. The AI sets the pace of production, the supervisor is tasked with calibrating the speed of the conveyor belt in accordance with it. The belts are always, always, turning. Someday the belts will run faster than you thought was possible. Someday, corporate hopes, the stowers, buffers, unloaders, supervisors, and the computer that runs it all will achieve equilibrium and rise together on promises of company swag and free takeout for lunch. Everyone is a customer. The problem of employing machinery in any industrial venture, whether that’s logistical or mass manufacture, is the problem of fixed capital. Even with bleeding-edge hardware or software, labor or time-saving devices, whatever, the venture is only as profitable as its workers. The machines can and will provide or make possible certain productivity rates yielding a certain quota, per shift, but only that baseline. To increase the surplus, to keep it rising, to make the workers – the human capital – more productive, the capitalist must employ other means. Automation was and wasn’t a bluff. Code, GPS trackers, apps, the scanner strapped to your fingers, the burner phones strapped to your bicep, your forearm, are the new regime now.

We are, all of us, Machines

[mynameisdanielshinbaum]

For Hennefeld and Baer, unwatchability represents “the aesthetic condition of a political moment in which the future looks bleak, unavoidably catastrophic, and increasingly uninhabitable,” but not in a vast and imperceptible way. Rather it is omnipresent in the way “multiplying screens, viral videos, and relentless news updates bombard us with violent and appalling content at nearly every turn.” It’s not that people can’t watch; it’s that they have to watch atrocities that they feel they can do nothing to prevent. Rather than being unseeable, the “unwatchable” world is seen too much. Hennefeld and Baer cite Alenka Zupančič, who defines unwatchability as when “something that ought not do so melts into visibility.” This is basically the opposite of a hyperobject, which at least resists being trivialized by becoming watchable, consumable. Hyperobjects retain their sublimity, negating our sense of agency by denying it any purchase, whereas Zupančič’s unwatchable negates our sense of agency by indulging it at the level of perception, so that we can only watch. That would seem to set the idea of unwatchability apart from the more vernacular idea of unwatchable movies or shows, so bad that they literally go unwatched. But Hennefeld and Baer conflate the helplessness of consuming bad news with the perversity of watching what we profess to find intolerable, arguing that “we’re a culture of hate-watchers.” That is, people feel compelled to watch what they also find appalling; there is pleasure in wanting but failing to look away.

Shareable Crime by Rob Horning