VidArt from VAD at Conduit

If you're in the Dallas, TX area, here's your chance to catch up on the medium that's now at the forefront of attention in the art world. The Dallas Video Festival has been showing great video art for twenty years, and in celebration of its 20th anniversary, the Video Association of Dallas is presenting a series of five programs of "greatest video art hits" from its archives, co-curated by Danette Dufilho and -- yeah, me.

The series, I Heart Video Art, takes place on five consecutive Fridays beginning June 29, at Conduit Gallery, at 1626-C Hi Line Drive, Dallas, TX (near the Oak Lawn exit off of 35E). Doors open at 7:30 pm; screenings start at 8 pm. For more info, call Conduit Gallery at 214-939-0064.

We're still finalizing the details, but you can see a draft program schedule here.

Alas, Not-So-Poor Yorick

My boyfriend used to say he wanted my skull after my death, but after seeing the Body Worlds exhibit (here's my review), he's not so sure. Too bad, 'cause tombs have never appealed to me; but Damien Hirst's For the Love of God does. (Per the NYT, the title came from Hirst's mother who exclaimed, "For the love of God, what are you going to do next?")

I want mine with little lightbulbs in the eye sockets.

Do you think art, or its patrons, are overly-obsessed with the wrong, or poorly-chosen realities lately? Would we like this piece as much with cz's? (Is what's-his-face using real powdered dinosaur bones, or just patronizing unregulated entrepreneurs? Personally, I'd like to know. Of course, if his real work consists in an experiment regarding our gullibility, GREAT; but then, I'll be annoyed if he doesn't share the experimental results.)

Actually, what I see lately is an existentialist trend -- an epidemic of ennui. Bush's handlers were prolly onto something when they let on he was reading Camus.

(Update here.)

How to Control the Internet (by Transforming It into a Top-Down Surveillance System)

It's not just AT&T you have to watch out for (for more on that, see post and thread here). A variety of efforts are underway to gain control of the only significant remaining independent venue for news and opinion.

David Gelernter, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is working with Ajay Royan, who is employed at a West Coast hedge fund, on another way to control those unruly internets (see article here; you may need to click "skip this welcome" at the top of the page). They want to replace the web with a new system they call the "Worldbeam."

With the Worldbeam, instead of everyone having their own documents stored on their own computers, everyone will access their documents on the Beam through a much simpler box. Not only your current docs, but every doc you ever wrote or viewed -- every e-mail, v-mail, snapshot, every web page visited, etc. -- will be stored on machines maintained elsewhere. You'll be able to access your documents from any box anywhere.

As Gelernter says, "The desktop is dead; all my information must be stored on the Beam . . . ." All your data are belong to us.

Theoretically, only you will have access to your documents, using some combination of biometric identification, a key card, a password or the like, and only you will have the ability to add to or delete your docs.

Mmm-hmmm. As insecure as our individual computers may be now, it's hard to see why our information wouldn't be even less secure if the primary storage is in machines owned and controlled by someone else.

There's no discussion of who would own or control the machines on which all this information is stored. One suspects the system protocols would be secret or proprietary.

How do you segregate your supposedly private docs from those you want to be available to others? "Whenever you create a new document, it's born with the same permissions as previous documents of the same type." (No explanation provided re- how the Beam will determine what docs are of the same type.) Gelernter continues, "Your personal beam contains load [sic] of information about your habits and preferences."

Obviously, the Beam would involve massive centralization of control over all content that might otherwise be available on the Web, plus all documents to which inappropriate permissions are assigned by the system, unless you happen to catch the inevitable errors, plus, potentially, even those docs you successfully designate as private, as well as exhaustive data about your habits and preferences.

You'll no longer own copies or rights to most software. Instead, you'll subscribe to basic service and have the opportunity to lease fancier applications.

The corporations who expect to sell or lease us these subscriptions and applications must regard the Beam with great joy. Among other things, controlling software centrally would enable providers to simply eliminate old applications whenever they liked, forcing customers to "upgrade" to versions they might or might not want. I would no longer have the power to just buy an application once and use it forever if it were continuing to do the job for me.

Gelernter says, "the Worldbeam should strengthen the world's responsible governments against terrorists and criminals and the individual against busybodies . . . . The Internet tells government agencies: You each have a separate information stash and your own network; sharing information requires extra effort. The Beam tells them: At base you all share one information stash: withholding information requires extra effort. . . . no one can plead "technical" reasons for not sharing" (I presume he means, "technological" reasons).

Of course, nothing prevents government agencies from building a unified information system now, other than the cost; and the cost for such a system must surely be vastly smaller than the cost of transforming the entire Internet.

More importantly . . . "responsible governments"? I presume he means the likes of the social democracy of Norway, as opposed to the U.S. government under the Bush Administration? For in the hands of the latter, not to mention even more tyrannical governments, the Beam would make it even easier to spy on innocent citizens for political purposes, etc.

My boyfriend says, don't worry, the Beam won't happen. I hope he's right; but. The Web has become one of few remaining avenues for challenges to the interests that now own and control much of our election process and nearly all of the traditional media. It seems to me the Beam offers a great deal to those interests.

I found Gerlernter's article in the May 7, 2007 issue of Forbes, which featured short articles by "28 Great Minds" on "The Power of Networks." The same issue also contained interesting articles from other authors with a greater appreciation of the virtues of decentralized, distributed ownership and control. In their own words:

"One of the great lessons of the 20th century is that centralized planning and control don't work. . . . Decentralization is fast and flexible. It allows exponential, viral growth." -- Rick Warren, founder of Saddleback Community Church ("The Power of Parishioners").

"The biggest mistake marketers make when they see the power of the consumer network is that they try to control it, own it or manipulate it." -- Seth Godin, marketing expert ("Your Product, Your Customer").

"A command-and-control model, the way one runs an army, is not well suited for new ideas." -- Jonathan Fahey, writing about Nicholas Negroponte's wiki-style project to develop a laptop that could be made for $100 each and provided to children around the world ("The Soul of a New Laptop").

"America can still win the battle for a democratic world. The most important weapon is a free, open, commercially and politically unfettered Internet that empowers ordinary people from across the globe to speak and act in the interests of their own communities." – Howard Dean, DNC Chair ("Wikipartia").

"The Internet functions best when its protocols are available to everyone . . . . there is wisdom in crowds, even – perhaps I should say especially – in crowds of volunteers and amateurs. . . . The great lesson of the Web 2.0 is that to control quality, you don't lock things down; you open them up." -- Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia ("Open-Door Policy").

Another article touched on important, related issues ("Can You Hear Me Now?"). Sherry Turkle, a professor at MIT, mentioned ideas expressed by many people that "'we're all being observed all the time anyway, so who needs privacy?' . . . When the question of political abuse came up, a common reaction . . . was . . . 'All information is good information' and 'Information wants to be free' and 'If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.'" Turkle is clearly concerned that these ideas lead us to acquiesce in government spying on innocent citizens.

I happen to agree that all information is good information. But what needs to be spelled out in no uncertain terms is that because knowledge is power, a balance of power requires a balance of knowledge.

In a democracy, the weight of power should belong to the people; or at worst, the balance should be equal. That means that our government's activities should be open and transparent to us – we should know at least as much about what our government is doing as our government knows about us. That's not the way things have been going lately.

The same goes with respect to corporations, which have all but superseded governments in terms of their power over our lives.

Centralizing ownership and control of Internet hardware and software might result in certain cost efficiencies, but effective regulation or oversight over those in possession of that ownership and control would become impossible, since they would have the power with a few keystrokes to alter every digital record on the planet – even private documents of my own that I never intended to share with anyone else.

Who controls the Beam will control history, and thus will have the power to botch if not completely control the present and future.

It's worth a lot to me personally NOT to have to cede that much control to any centralized entity, governmental or corporate.

But so long as there's so much power and money to be gained by those who seek that control, eternal vigilance will remain the price of Internet liberty.

(Update here.)

Meals on Wheels

Get past the first song; it's short, and the rest are in English.



(Thanks, Snarky!)

Demtoids: The Curiously Weak Dem Leaders

UPDATE: If you want something more to make you go, hmm . . . go here: [per Representative Dennis Kucinich,] "Democrats in Congress . . . made some secret concessions to the Republicans in [a version of the] Bill to continue funding the Iraq War . . . . They include:

"Privatization of Iraq’s Oil – . . . . A rule was created that said this clause could not be removed during debate on House floor. [" . . . Iraqis would not own their own oil, but instead International oil companies, primarily US oil companies, would divide ownership of the oil." (For more recent details,go here.)]

"Bush could invade Iran without approval of Congress. A clause that would require him to get approval from Congress first was removed. . . .

AND here: "[Dem-led Congress] left town early yesterday after caving in to administration demands that it allow warrantless surveillance of the phone calls and e-mails of American citizens, with scant judicial supervision and no reporting to Congress about how many communications are being intercepted. [This legislation] was strong-armed through both chambers by an administration that seized the opportunity to write its warrantless wiretapping program into law . . . . Instead of having the [FISA] court ensure that surveillance is being done properly . . . that job would be up to the attorney general and the director of national intelligence."

Original post below.
____________

Please contact your U.S. Congressional representatives TODAY to protest the pending bi-partisan compromise that would fund the Iraq War without imposing any meaningful timeline or benchmarks. You can identify and contact your reps through the "Contact your U.S. Congressional reps" link in the left-hand side-bar on this page under "Sites I Like." For more info, see Keith Olbermann's comments. K.O. agrees: Bush is holding our kids hostage, demanding more money though he's demonstrated he won't spend it on them anyway.

Then watch this video about the problems with pending election reform bill, H.R. 811, and you'll understand more than Dem leaders seem to care to know about what it takes to ensure fair elections.

One starts to wonder whether it's merely the Dems' near-equal dependence on monied interests that accounts for their apparent weakness . . . does Rove have dirt on them or something? The revelation could hardly bring more shame on them than they've already brought on themselves.

I'm giving you the links instead of embedding the videos so you can go to YouTube and rate these videos up.

Please help spread the word.

Body Worlds

Highly recommended. Combines grossness and kitsch to yield an aesthetic frisson unmatched since The Little Shop of Horrors. One "plastinated" man holds his own internal organs aloft like a trophy. Another has been sliced vertically into slabs, tattooed portraits of exotic women still fully legible on the ribbons of skin encircling the slabs (Damien H., eat your heart out). There's even a gigantic, half-dissected horse surmounted by a half-dissected human holding his own brain in one hand and the horse's in the other – if only it were their penises. The best pieces are displayed with metal plaques bearing the signature of the proud scientist/artist, Gunther von Hagens.

My boyfriend got dizzy after five minutes and hurried out; I felt strangely famished. More info at the Body Worlds site; here's Wikipedia's summary of certain controversies; and here's a page with a great pic of von Hagens with one of his creations (he's the one in the hat).

An Advantage of Having a Deaf Cat

Deaf from birth, I understand.



Why wait to vacuum the whole house, when you can catch it at the source.

Death.

I’m not sure why this cracks me up, but.

Went on a road trip from Dallas, TX to Bisti Badlands, northern NM, and Mesa Verde, southern CO. Basically a two-day drive home.

Nite before the nite before we’re to start driving back, my arm starts starts puffing up. Next day it’s worse.

After my sig. other starts snoring, I google swollen arms — normally I’d just call my dr., but I’m trying to decide whether to call his answering service (since it's the wknd), fly back, ignore the problem, etc. — and learn that puffy arms can be a symptom of a rare breast cancer that’s virtually undetectable until too late to treat; I could, like, have 6 mos. to live.

So I call my dr.’s answering service and the dr. on call has never heard of this kind of cancer; a blood clot's a possibility; my options are to start driving home or spend time waiting in a Durango emergency dept. So me and my honey start driving home.

So I've got my arm in the air for two days, to try to minimize further puffing (and since I happened to have had minor surgery on my other hand a couple of weeks ago, I'm supposed to keep that arm up, too -- I'm in continual "touchdown" mode); I'm NOT telling my hon I might be dead in 6 mos., ‘cause I don't want him to be as freaked as I am; I'm blaming my leaking tears on sunscreen while thinking how unfair it is for me to die so young while I’m pretty sure that gal behind the lunch counter is doing less with her time on Earth, even if she is younger; could I maybe cadge help from sympathetic friends to try to finish my various incomplete art and other projects? which would actually be pretty great ‘cause I’d actually much rather think works up than execute them; how I'm really pretty f---ing tired already and the main reason I want to stick around is to complete my work; how dying young-ish might lend glamour to my creative products and enhance their impact; who should speak at my funeral, and at least there would be more good speakers now than if I’d waited and survived more of my friends; how I'd write an oration to be read at the end so that, even though I'm pretty sure my friends would be eloquent, I’d still have the last word, ha ha! I actually start writing it in my head, etc. (Ok I'm nuts, but it was a pretty vivid way to spend two days in a car.)

To extend the sports metaphor, I'm not sure why: my goal is not to make the game last forever. My goal isn’t even to “win.”

My goal is to develop everything I’ve got — every energy, aptitude, and capacity — to the maximum; to deploy it all as effectively as I can; and then to slam into home plate having depleted everything except whatever I’ve managed to pass on for others’ use (let's call the latter torches, just to add a third sport — seems most people who like them can't get enough).

When I die, I'll lose many things I love — my work, my boyfriend, my friends, sex, art, literature, beauty, all the sensual pleasures of life, the joy of dancing, travel, interacting with so many people and things in so many ways, booze, shoes (though perhaps near the end I'll try the few drugs I‘ve avoided so far) . . .

But what I’ve lived with most closely all these years — what must be by far the greatest loss, at least for me — will surely be myself (except, of course, to the extent I'm already losing my mind and body little by little in advance).

I’m the one who’s always been there for me, though often only theoretically; I am as much, for me, as intimacy will probably ever be; perhaps only my own thoughts have never been too dumb to engross me nor so smart as to go over my head. Why should the loss of myself matter less to me than the loss of anyone, anything else?

I’ve had lots of complaints about myself over the years, many fully justified; but I’ve also tried to be someone I could love, ‘though I rarely thought of it that way — I thought I was just trying to be someone I could stand.

I sure haven’t succeeded in the sense of being all I wish I could be; but I’ve been lucky enough to find a value or purpose in life I feel I can justify as well as any other, and to have had the luxury of being able more or less to persevere in trying to further it.

What I think is most important, for me, is just sincerely, continually trying make things better, including just augmenting the total truth, beauty, and fun in the world.

(Because even if you're an agnostic, as I am, I'm pretty sure we’ve got nothing better to do.)

Knowing that sooner or later I'll die, I think I'm entitled to mourn the loss of me, in addition to everything else. (And, to be more complete: not just because of whatever virtues I've managed intermittently to display, but also for some of the things I'd miss about anyone else: the smells, textures, instrumentalities, and effectiveness of my own body and mind, the delicious vices, the intentional and especially the unintentional humor, the surprises — it's always fun to find any of us are capable of anything other than what we expected.)

You can say I won't be here to miss myself, but you have to say that of everything else, too.

The swelling turned out to be from a blood clot (knapsack strap pinched shoulder); so, for now, I'm living.