bisceglie on smash

new blog location for all ITP unrelated discourse

(http://www.hyperradiant.net/blog)

on Failure

"F Minus!"

That was (Dr) Tony DeRitis' favorite exclamation for whenever some sleep-deprived student made a dumb comment — and don't let your elementary-school teachers fool you, there are such things as dumb comments and questions. This semester I haven't really been studying Interactive Telecommunications so much as failure. This is 50% tongue in cheack, 50% desperate gallows humor, and 20% damn-serious wisdom — perspicacity. Capstone made sure I knew the taste of failure, and graduation allowed me to deal with it. Acadamia is for failure —l and that's its greatest success. Savvy? I'm not afraid to try new things — things I know little to nothing about. Java? MAX/MSP/JITTER? MySQL? Video tracking? Chroma-keying? But the actual result means nothing — as compared to the process. I find this true not just in acadamia, but in the professional world as well. The cliche "say whatever you want about me and my work, just say it" entertains the most important value in any business. Theres small difference in fame and notoriety. I'd fail any day, so long as my goal + work-ethic was proportionally greater. Zero-sum game.

So stop saying 'it's okay, you'll do better next time.' Because it's okay, you'll do better next time. Blue skies are ahead.

ITP Winter Show

2000 people on the 4th floor of Tisch over two days. What a brilliant mess this has to be. As of yet, I have one project in the show — the Sound Domes for Spatial Design. The SMS-SmartCase just wont be fully functional/ready, I think. J2ME has been too strong — I can't beat it. Not yet... But I will. And the victory will be sweet, and the hills will ring with song, blue sky bright with the light of a thousand Suns. But the sound domes...

Java + MSP + Physical Computing

What else do you really want in an installation piece? It's a post-linear, post-narrative spatial exploration of temporal auditory stimulation — literally tranplanting experience. And its mostly made of big, shiny salad bowls. The piece is interactive — to an extent — different audio content programs are controllable by SMS text-messaging — implemented with code I hacked together earlier in the semester. It seems like everything that gets done is hacked out. Maybe thats the new art.

]]> To continue the tangent theme... I've lately had issues concerning art — the labeling, the validity, the context, etc. It seems that art is anything frivolous without liquid commercial value that exemplifies a certain contextual reference... essentially, anything called 'art'. But who cares. It's a tired argument. Artistic-expression is coming about as a humanizing link between technology and marketing. The creativity lies in that little crevice as well — the application of technology to propagate a concept — a narrative. The system is not a pyramid structure.

I find curious this new trend of ubiquity. The world is shrinking to the size of a cell-phone. Bob Greenberg spoke about the impossibility of escaping the job, with the prevelance of laptops, cell-phones, broadband wireless, high-speed travel, satellite comm... Is this scary?

Just what is physical data — is it real/imaginary/valuable? How can a physical body [meat-puppet] classify something so abstract as pure data? Can a byte's value be measured in some electronic flux quotient. I won't shut up about the new paradigm — a new meta/physics — liquid, allowing for the virtual — the logical. But what if this is the wrong way? Spinoza maintained physical divinity. Is this physical divinity an abstraction of the transient omnipotent — what we view as abstract? Knots.

Life now consists of research in social web applications, algorithmic filtering, and J2ME development. Stumbled across an amazing resource with the name of Paul Graham. Super intelligent guy, with a lot of interesting things to say. A Plan for Spam is especially relevant to what I'm currently working on - and his study of Bayesian Filtering

enjoy

Filth.

Just finished Sartre's Nausea. Pretty evocative work.

]]> The title really spells it out... that sick feeling you get when things become too vivid - screaming existence, while clearly insubstantial. Being and Nothingness... blah blah blah. Seems all these things suffer from a lack of extension. The process just falls apart. Maybe this is true as a result of cybernetics - fluid networks - abstract relational node-based transducer systems. Or something equally quasi-sensical. Sensationalism. Again and again i hear people denounce philosophy for fear of introspection. Bullshit? Bullshit. Introspection breeds schizophrenia. Bisected consciousness. Destruction of language - social castration. Im not looking for the meaning of life, but for the reason of question. I think. I was playing with a few thoughts on the train this morning... mostly concerning electricity. Which makes absolutely no fucking sense. And waves. Which also make no fucking sense. Issues of control. Yea, these things are pretty silly and obtuse, but when you relate them with networking... social networks, conceptual info-networks... whatever... It all ties in to Top down classification - something language is very good at... in a lazy way... as opposed to the more fluid relational stuff. But electricity flows, it can be contained in a vacuum, but is always in flux. Entropy. diminishing returns.

"A great menace weighs over the city."

Midway through Sartre's Nausea—right to the list of most enjoyable books I've read. I find comfort in his writing—his style. It is like my own. Expository. Conceptually, the work is dated, barbarian—as compared to his later work, to the popular post-modernism of the now. Still, the treatment is biting, a stark reality—to borrow another two words from the guy. I wonder how many actually do feel a semblance of nausea—that hyper-vivid stomach-churning jab from your inner perspicacity. Sometimes I can sense a distinct smell, neither pleasant nor otherwise, but clearly alien. Colorblind synesthesia.

del.icio.us is the new google.

on tagging...
tag-tagger
tagsonomy
de.lirio.us
Clay on ontology
toetag
simply
freetag
cloudalicio.us

and of course
del.icio.us
flickr
livejournal

ontology is shite.

]]> random cool stuff...
sonic finger-texting
touch-typing

Tag the system

Flickr. Del.icio.us. Ning. Tagging is the relatively new [about 2 years old] implementation of a dynamic and multidimensional organization structure for digital content. There is no shelf on the world wide web, so the same constraints need not — cannot be applied. Classical thought describes a top-down approach to labeling content — as can be seen in such organizational systems as the Dewey Decimal System. This was mostly brought on by Clay Shirky's lecture in my Tuesday Applications class.

My problem doesnt lie so much with tagging as the overal human information organization paradigm. Big and lofty, right? Tagging is great, but there are a lot of holes.

>> Anyone can tag anything whatever they want — errors and all. Mallintentions and all. A mess of synonyms and misspellings. That said, what is communication but a big confusing labyrinth?

>> Problems arise when grouping created and visited content. There is no real way to compare these things — as in combining del.icio.us tags with flickr tags. Metadata would make this kind of cumbersome.

>> The tagging solution is still but 2 dimensional. Information needs to evolve dynamically to compliment the explicit user. A multidimensionally dynamic nuclear system.

>> Visualization is poor.

New Toy

lomo
Originally uploaded by bisceglie.

Meet the fish-eye.

Two new projects in the works. Check them out

HERE and HERE

And be sure to check for hyperradiant.net

On Design

Lately, I've been questioning the directions of interactive and immersive design. This is a huge and slippery topic — one often brought up to no real conclusions. I feel that the current players in design don't have a clear — or adequate, really — vision. The industry — and by osmosis pop-culture — is poluted with banal euphemisms, aphorisms, buzz-terms. 'Information architecture', 'immersion', 'designing experience', 'form over function'. These concepts and terms are thrown around without true introspection. There is a difference between innovation — designing for future — and designing for functionality. Of course, one must take into account existing product and the immediate needs of consumers. Ideally, precedence would be divided between the two, giving more oportunity for paradigm change — which is the essential target.

My reason for trying to articulate my thoughts on this subject come from my distaste for a gross amount of 'innovative' works. Huge Hi-res image/video instalation is pointless. If an immersive experience is saught after, how could a 2-dimensional array of pixels ever attempt adequacy? Even wrapping around the viewer. I find this outlook futile. And whats worse, existing technology is so often bastardized for these causes — inadequate and bulky works — that are largely not at all innovative. I denounce the work of Clifford Ross. I denounce all the minority report-like interfaces that require a piece of glass. Whats the point? In the same setting, an opaque touch LCD would work just fine. In contrast, a 3D interface would be much more suited for 3D control mechanism. And not to suggest that such a 3D interface would have no use, as the opposite is true.

I recently read an article in 4d Space - Interactive Arcitecture, that brought up historical value. The author maintained the integrity of a given work lies in its ability for historical transendance — and not the technology it employs. This concept is difficult to manuever, as clearly the technology is inescapable, but the aesthetics are the issue. There is much talk of masking the technology, and escaping the prison of the cargo-cult — something that is extremely valid.

Link time

Stanford U on iTUNES
Collaborative text tool
Pretty.
Location Location Location...
Laser Tracking
Human Interface

Semi-Organized Vignettes [mostly] on Why the Internet Sucks

Its no secret that the internet sucks. But articulating just what sucks about the actual 'internet,' or world wide web and what its used for is tough to finger. The conceptual nature and the 'physical' structure of the internet are two entirely different entities, each capable of unique existence and purpose. This also characterizes the internets two categories of shortcomings - technological and not (largely social, psychological, even philosophical). I was speaking with a friend over AIM, when the subject of this essay came up. She said "the internet sucks because it makes people lazy." I replied, "thats asinine." Still, this exemplifies most peoples' thoughts on technology and the internet - the mass cognitive dissonance that humanity resonates with. The internet is a phenomenal tool that has enormous - infinite potential - to aide human existence, production, advancement, progression, etc.

]]> Its no secret that the internet sucks. But articulating just what sucks about the actual 'internet,' or world wide web and what its used for is tough to finger. The conceptual nature and the 'physical' structure of the internet are two entirely different entities, each capable of unique existence and purpose. This also characterizes the internets two categories of shortcomings - technological and not (largely social, psychological, even philosophical). I was speaking with a friend over AIM, when the subject of this essay came up. She said "the internet sucks because it makes people lazy." I replied, "thats asinine." Still, this exemplifies most peoples' thoughts on technology and the internet - the mass cognitive dissonance that humanity resonates with. The internet is a phenomenal tool that has enormous - infinite potential - to aide human existence, production, advancement, progression, etc.
All said, the WWW/internet/whatever [is and] is not a physically substantial entity. The digital medium is abstract - representative - not subject to the constraints of physical reality, yet somehow given subjective and fluctuating value. The abstract needs an interface - or an interface to the interface. . There must be something that allows one some way to create something completely inhuman, outside our scope. Of course, this is not the ends, as any media must not to exist in and of itself, for the sole purpose of existence. the assigned mode and modus must be proactive. It should be treated as Plato's perfect circles - Aristotelian. Exchange 'hypertext' for 'hyper-context.' I understand current bandwidth constraints, but preparation should be underway to cycle in the new media.
Still, there needs to be a 'geography'. This geography would of course be dynamic - slave to the specific instant.
Whenever immersive computing comes up, I immediately think of Flatland (Abbott). Geometric entities sliding around a plane [read monitor screen] according to The Rules. The digital network requires a new science - a new geometry - Multidimensional and liquid.
Tagging is a valiant effort to tame the hodgepodge, but is not nearly adequate. The future of tagging lies in spammers tagging the hell out of lots and lots of crap. True, this abuse can be accounted for, to some extent, by algorithms... but it is an imperfect solution - like most things, looking at a symptom (quick fix) and not a cure for the actual ailment.
Artificial Intelligence is almost necessary for real functionality. Intelligent parsing. At least intelligent algorithms for data mining - subjective classification / learning. virtual archivists. Artificial intelligence is a scary term - as people relate it to artificial human malignant intelligence. Simple answer - don't model it after humans. Intelligence can be easily limited and controlled. William Gibson's concept of an electromagnetic shotgun wired to the AI head is but a crude base. Artificial intelligence in this sense is not new at all, as it existed before the internet, before even affordable and accessible personal computers. Artificial intelligence can be as simple as a contrived anti-entropy device. [note Norbert Weiner's work].
The concept of the online avatar should be reversed. What is a human body but a meat-puppet chugging along to commands from your brain? Of course, its more complicated than that, but essentially, your consciousness rents a flat in a big semi-soft blob to get around and communicate and procreate. Give your brain a nice metal exoskeleton with unfathomable reflexes... better yet, just forget the physical. What's a nervous system but a conduit for interrelated electrical explosions? But that wouldn't be human, would it? It all comes back to metaphysics.

Concepts of ownership need to be modified. Commodity-centric economic systems have no room for 1s and 0s. The struggle for intellectual property. Intellectual property is ethereal, a future-primitive specter. Collage production. This isn't a new concept, at all. But now, people can create ~exact 'copies' of existing works - with very little resource expenditure. Such a readily-available spring-board for creation brings the factories to the home - the personal space, equipped with a computer, ethernet, and Red Bull - a new age of cottage industry - yet so much more. A global cottage industry.
Self-expression is a vehicle for development and innovation. The same thing was done in the industrial revolution, but now intellectual property is being abused, etc. The living conditions are better, etc. Bottom line - harnessing masses of 'creative' youngsters - the pop-cultures.
The pop-science documentary 'What the Bleep do we Know' brought up some interesting thought regarding human perception of purely new/unfamiliar phenomena. The example from the film explained that the Native Americans couldn't see the explorer's ships - since they were completely outside their frame of reference. The shamen / medicine men were the only people able to actual view the ships, until the images had time to sink in for the other members of the tribes. And thats where I fell asleep. But I wonder, would this still be the case with people today? Free time is a commodity, beauty is a real commodity. Both of these are relatively new phenomena. Appreciation and empowerment. I would like to think that I, personally, would be able to see something completely different and new - if only because I've been exposed to so many abstract concepts. This extends to a huge amount of people in society today - the age of artistry. Self-expression is valued more than ever, and available to boot, largely due to the digital publishing revolution. Technological advancement seeks to fill a glass. The glass is infinite, the liquid is infinity.

Vernacular Press online.

After much editing, debugging, and temper-tantrums, the new and much improved Vernacular Press site is online. Hopefully it works in your browser. Hopefully you will holler at me if it doesn't.

Working on a new site for the Vernacular book Categories—On the Beaty of Physics. Its shaping up to be pretty cool, loads of designery, dynamic coolness.