February 17, 2017 § Leave a comment
1. Q&A is an online interview project that sells longform interviews as ebooks through Amazon and other online outlets. I used to be a magazine editor and this is what I see as a viable contemporary format for the magazine. It’s inside the network, as it were.
2. Q&A is a magazine, but one that is formed by the characteristics of the context it’s presented within. This means that each individual interview will function on its own and as part of the broader Q&A project. The challenge for the project is to create a context of intelligibility for the idea “Q&A”, an understanding about what this combination of letters means within the context created. This is also a question of establishing a context of trust — trust that the product has a certain consistency and quality, which is what all branding aspires to.
3. Strictly speaking, calling Q&A a magazine is a misnomer. Rather it is a product of the network. Describing the project in this way points to how Q&A gets activated by the interests of its readers. Internet giants’ Google and Amazon are central to how it works. Search and social media organize the Internet today and as such they create specific opportunities for how journalism can be practiced – specifically: 1) through the development of in-depth niche content; 2) for the interest of a non-local (global) audience; 3) with longterm relevance.
4. Q&A takes this form in part due to an understanding that it is very hard to maintain a front page on the Internet. Huge resources are required to keep up with the 24/7 global demand for fresh content it enables. News organizations like the Guardian and the New York Times can manage it; organizations like the Gawker blog network or the Huffington Post take a different approach of producing a lot of content quickly, often on the backs of the major news networks by editorializing on news items they produce and inviting their readers to join in, to create extended online conversations.
5. A lot of the content typical of the latter approach tends towards the prurient or sensational. So, as I like to say, a publisher on the Internet is either a farmer or a troll — the former cultivates an audience through considered development of content, and the latter conjures its audience into existence through one form of provocation or another, in the hope that it provokes a response. My approach is farming with a focus on what I like to think of as the developing culture of the 21st century. This includes interviews with contemporary artists, because they are naturally prognosticators about what it means to live in the present (the edge of the future,) as well as trends that are under-the-radar of broad cultural awareness. The blockchain and its applications (including Ethereum) and the Occupy movement and natural life extension are some examples.
6. Q&A takes advantage of the unique power of the Internet to create a backcatalog of all kinds of content with a high degree of specificity, and distribute it widely. On the Internet any kind of niche at all can be catered to, and is. Q&A proposes to take advantage of this by producing in-depth interviews about topics that might not otherwise be covered. The niche is what I see as an emerging culture of time; i.e., those topics that do not necessarily have a mainstream audience yet, but still is of interest to specific constituencies.
7. The phrase “conversational thinking,” provides a good explanation for my interest in the interview format. I got it from Clive Thompson’s book Smarter Than You Think (2013). Thinking happens in conversation that wouldn’t happen otherwise, and I like the way the interview format helps formalize this process. I believe the popularity of the Q&A format is part of the participatory tendency now at work in the culture at large, one that has been fostered by the Internet. It’s interesting to think that the web answers a pent-up demand for collaboration and the active production of knowledge by all kinds of people that, before it was broadly adapted to, apparently wasn’t well-understood.
October 11, 2016 § 3 Comments
Is blockchain technology the new internet?
The blockchain is an undeniably ingenious invention – the brainchild of a person or group of people known by the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto.
By allowing digital information to be distributed but not copied, blockchains create the backbone of a new type of internet. Originally devised for the digital currency, Bitcoin, the tech community is now finding other potential uses for the technology.
Bitcoin has been called “digital gold”, and for good reason. To date, the total value of currency is close to $9 billion US. And blockchains can make other types of digital value. Like the internet (or your car), you don’t need to know how the blockchain works to use it. However, having a basic knowledge of this new technology shows why it’s considered revolutionary.
“The blockchain is an incorruptible digital ledger of economic transactions that can be programmed to record not just financial transactions but virtually everything of value.”
Don & Alex Tapscott, authors Blockchain Revolution (2016)
A distributed database
Picture a spreadsheet that is duplicated thousands of times across a network of computers. Then imagine that this network is designed to regularly update this spreadsheet and you have a basic understanding of the blockchain.
Information held on a blockchain exists as a shared — and continually reconciled — database. This is a way of using the network that has obvious benefits. The blockchain database isn’t stored in any single location, meaning the records it keeps are truly public and easily verifiable. No centralized version of this information exists for a hacker to corrupt. Hosted by millions of computers simultaneously, its data is accessible to anyone on the internet.
To go in deeper with the google spreadsheet analogy I would like you to read this piece from a blockchain specialist.
Blockchain as Google Docs
“The traditional way of sharing documents with collaboration is to send a Microsoft Word document to another recipient, and ask them to make revisions to it. The problem with that scenario is that you need to wait until receiving a return copy before you can see or make other changes, because you are locked out of editing it until the other person is done with it. That’s how databases work today. Two owners can’t be messing with the same record at once.That’s how banks maintain money balances and transfers; they briefly lock access (or decrease the balance) while they make a transfer, then update the other side, then re-open access (or update again).
With Google Docs (or Google Sheets), both parties have access to the same document at the same time, and the single version of that document is always visible to both of them. It is like a shared ledger, but it is a shared document. The distributed part comes into play when sharing involves a number of people.
Imagine the number of legal documents that should be used that way. Instead of passing them to each other, losing track of versions, and not being in sync with the other version, why can’t *all* business documents become shared instead of transferred back and forth? So many types of legal contracts would be ideal for that kind of workflow.
You don’t need a blockchain to share documents, but the shared documents analogy is a powerful one.”
William Mougayar, author The Business Blockchain (2016)
Durability and robustness
Blockchain technology is like the internet in that it has a built-in robustness. By storing blocks of information that are identical across its network, the blockchain cannot:
- Be controlled by any single entity.
- Has no single point of failure.
Bitcoin was invented in 2008. Since that time, the Bitcoin blockchain has operated without significant disruption. (To date, any of problems associated with Bitcoin have been due to hacking or mismanagement. In other words, these problems come from bad intention and human error, not flaws in the underlying concepts.)
The internet itself has proven to be durable for almost 30 years. It’s a track record that bodes well for blockchain technology as it continues to be developed.
Transparent and incorruptible
The blockchain network lives in a state of consensus, one that automatically checks in with itself every ten minutes. A kind of self-auditing ecosystem of digital value, the network reconciles every transaction that happens in ten minute intervals. Each group of these transactions is referred to as a “block”. Two important properties result from this:
data is embedded within network as a whole, by definition it is public.
- It cannot be corrupted
altering any unit of information on the blockchain would mean using a huge amount of computing power to override the entire network.
In theory, this could be possible. In practice, it’s unlikely to happen. Taking control of the system to capture Bitcoins, for instance, would also have the effect of destroying their value.
“Blockchain solves the problem of manipulation. When I speak about it in the West, people say they trust Google, Facebook, or their banks. But the rest of the world doesn’t trust organizations and corporations that much — I mean Africa, India, the Eastern Europe, or Russia. It’s not about the places where people are really rich. Blockchain’s opportunities are the highest in the countries that haven’t reached that level yet.”
Vitalik Buterin, inventor of Ethereum
A network of nodes
A network of so-called computing “nodes” make up the blockchain.
(computer connected to the blockchain network using a client that performs the task of validating and relaying transactions) gets a copy of the blockchain, which gets downloaded automatically upon joining the blockchain network.
Together nodes create a powerful second-level network, a wholly different vision for how the internet can function.
Every node is an “administrator” of the blockchain, and joins the network voluntarily (in this sense, the network is decentralized). However, each one has an incentive for participating on the network: the chance of winning Bitcoins.
Nodes are said to be “mining” Bitcoin, but the term is something of a misnomer. In fact, each one is competing to win Bitcoins by solving computational puzzles. Bitcoin was the raison d’etre of the blockchain as it was originally conceived. It’s now recognized to be only the first of many potential applications of the technology.
There are an estimated 700 Bitcoin-like cryptocurrencies (exchangeable value tokens) already available. As well, a range of other potential adaptations of the original blockchain concept are currently active, or in development.
“Bitcoin has the same character a fax machine had. A single fax machine is a doorstop. A world where everyone has a fax machine is an immensely valuable thing.”
Larry Summers, Former US Secretary of the Treasury
The idea of decentralization
By design, the blockchain is a decentralized technology.
Anything that happens on it is a function of the network as a whole. Some important implications stem from this. By creating a new way to verify transactions aspects of traditional commerce could become unnecessary. Stock market trades become almost simultaneous on the blockchain, for instance — or it could make types of record keeping, like a land registry, fully public. And decentralization is already a reality.
A global network of computers use blockchain technology to jointly manage the database that records Bitcoin transactions. That is, Bitcoin is managed by its network, and not any one central authority. Decentralization means the network operates on a user-to-user (or peer-to-peer) basis. The forms of mass collaboration this makes possible are just beginning to be investigated.
“I think decentralized networks will be the next huge wave in technology.”
Melanie Swan, author Blockchain: Blueprint for a New Economy (2015)
Who will use the blockchain?
As web infrastructure, you don’t need to know about the blockchain for it to be useful in your life.
Currently, finance offers the strongest use cases for the technology. International remittances, for instance. The World Bank estimates that over $430 billion US in money transfers were sent in 2015.
The blockchain potentially cuts out the middleman for these types of transactions. Personal computing became accessible to the general public with the invention of the Graphical User Interface (GUI), which took the form of a “desktop”. Similarly, the most common GUI devised for the blockchain are the so-called “wallet” applications, which people use to buy things with Bitcoin, and store it along with other cryptocurrencies.
Transactions online are closely connected to the processes of identity verification. It is easy to imagine that wallet apps will transform in the coming years to include other types of identity management.
“Online identity and reputation will be decentralized. We will own the data that belongs to us.”
William Mougayar, Venture advisor, 4x entrepreneur, marketer & strategist.
By storing data across its network, the blockchain eliminates the risks that come with data being held centrally.
Its network lacks centralized points of vulnerability that computer hackers can exploit. Today’s internet has security problems that are familiar to everyone. We all rely on the “username/password” system to protect our identity and assets online. Blockchain security methods use encryption technology.
The basis for this are the so-called public and private “keys”. A “public key” (a long, randomly-generated string of numbers) is a users’ address on the blockchain. Bitcoins sent across the network gets recorded as belonging to that address. The “private key” is like a password that gives its owner access to their Bitcoin or other digital assets. Store your data on the blockchain and it is incorruptible. This is true, although protecting your digital assets will also require safeguarding of your private key by printing it out, creating what’s referred to as a paper wallet.
A second-level network
With blockchain technology, the web gains a new layer of functionality.
Already, users can transact directly with one another — Bitcoin transactions in 2016 averaged over $200,000 US per day. With the added security brought by the blockchain new internet business are on track to unbundle the traditional institutions of finance.
Goldman Sachs believes that blockchain technology holds great potential especially to optimize clearing and settlements, and could represent global savings of up to $6bn per year.
The blockchain gives internet users the ability to create value and authenticate digital information. What new business applications will result?
Distributed ledgers enable the coding of simple contracts that will execute when specified conditions are met. Ethereum is an open source blockchain project that was built specifically to realize this possibility. Still in its early stages, Ethereum has the potential to leverage the usefulness of blockchains on a truly world changing scale.
At the technology’s current level of development, smart contracts can be programmed to perform simple functions. For instance, a derivative could be paid out when a financial instrument meets certain benchmark, with the use of blockchain technology and Bitcoin enabling the payout to be automated.
The sharing economy
With companies like Uber and AirBnB flourishing, the sharing economy is already a proven success. Currently, however, users who want to hail a ride-sharing service have to rely on an intermediary like Uber. By enabling peer-to-peer payments, the blockchain opens the door to direct interaction between parties — a truly decentralized sharing economy results.
An early example, OpenBazaar uses the blockchain to create a peer-to-peer eBay. Download the app onto your computing device and you can transact with OpenBazzar vendors without paying transaction fees. The “no rules” ethos of the protocol means that personal reputation will be even more important to business interactions than it currently is on eBay.
Crowd funding initiatives like Kickstarter and Gofundme are doing the advance work for the emerging peer-to-peer economy. The popularity of these sites suggests people want to have a direct say in product development. Blockchains take this interest to the next level, potentially creating crowd-sourced venture capital funds.
In 2016, one such experiment, the Ethereum-based DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization), raised an astonishing $200 million USD in just over two months. Participants purchased “DAO tokens” allowing them to vote on smart contract venture capital investments (voting power was proportionate to the number of DAO they were holding). A subsequent hack of project funds proved that the project was launched without proper due diligence, with disastrous consequences. Regardless, the DAO experiment suggests the blockchain has the potential to usher in “a new paradigm of economic cooperation.”
By making the results fully transparent and publicly accessible, distributed database technology could bring full transparency to elections or any other kind of poll taking. Ethereum-based smart contracts help to automate the process.
The app, Boardroom, enables organizational decision-making to happen on the blockchain. In practice this means company governance becomes fully transparent and verifiable when managing digital assets, equity or information.
Supply chain auditing
Consumers increasingly want to know that the ethical claims companies make about their products are real. Distributed ledgers provide an easy way to certify that the backstories of the things we buy are genuine. Transparency comes with blockchain-based timestamping of a date and location — on ethical diamonds, for instance — that corresponds to a product number.
The UK-based Provenance offers supply chain auditing for a range of consumer goods. Making use of the Ethereum blockchain, a Provenance pilot project ensures that fish sold in Sushi restaurants in Japan has been sustainably harvested by its suppliers in Indonesia.
Decentralizing file storage on the internet brings clear benefits. Distributing data throughout the network protects files from getting hacked or lost.
Inter Planetary File System (IPFS) makes it easy to conceptualize how a distributed web might operate. Similar to the way a bittorrent moves data around the internet, IPFS gets rid of the need for centralized client-server relationships (i.e., the current web). An internet made up of completely decentralized websites has the potential to speed up file transfer and streaming times. Such an improvement is not only convenient. It’s a necessary upgrade to the web’s currently overloaded content-delivery systems.
The crowdsourcing of predictions on event probability is proven to have a high degree of accuracy. Averaging opinions cancels out the unexamined biases that distort judgment. Prediction markets that pay out according to event outcomes are already active. Blockchains are a “wisdom of the crowd” technology that will no doubt find other applications in the years to come.
Still in Beta, the prediction market application Augur makes share offerings on the outcome of real world events. Participants can earn money by buying into the correct prediction. The more shares purchased in the correct outcome, the higher the payout will be. With a small commitment of funds (less than a dollar), anyone can ask a question, create a market based on a predicted outcome, and collect half of all transaction fees the market generates.
Protection of intellectual property
As is well known, digital information can be infinitely reproduced — and distributed widely thanks to the internet. This has given web users globally a goldmine of free content. However, copyright holders have not been so lucky, losing control over their intellectual property and suffering financially as a consequence. Smart contracts can protect copyright and automate the sale of creative works online, eliminating the risk of file copying and redistribution.
Mycelia uses the blockchain to create a peer-to-peer music distribution system. Founded by the UK singer-songwriter Imogen Heap, Mycelia enables musicians to sell songs directly to audiences, as well as licence samples to producers and divvy up royalties to songwriters and musicians — all of these functions being automated by smart contracts. The capacity of blockchains to issue payments in fractional cryptocurrency amounts (micropayments) suggests this use case for the blockchain has a strong chance of success.
Internet of Things (IoT)
What is the IoT? The network-controlled management of certain types of electronic devices — for instance, the monitoring of air temperature in a storage facility. Smart contracts make the automation of remote systems management possible. A combination of software, sensors, and the network facilitates an exchange of data between objects and mechanisms. The result increases system efficiency and improves cost monitoring.
The biggest players in manufacturing, tech and telecommunications are all vying for IoT dominance. Think Samsung, IBM and AT&T. A natural extension of existing infrastructure controlled by incumbents, IoT applications will run the gamut from predictive maintenance of mechanical parts to data analytics, and mass-scale automated systems management.
Blockchain technology enables the buying and selling of the renewable energy generated by neighbourhood microgrids. When solar panels make excess energy, Ethereum-based smart contracts automatically redistribute it. Similar types of smart contract automation will have many other applications as the IoT becomes a reality.
Located in Brooklyn, Consensys is one of the foremost companies globally that is developing a range of applications for Ethereum. One project they are partnering on is Transactive Grid, working with the distributed energy outfit, LO3. A prototype project currently up and running uses Ethereum smart contracts to automate the monitoring and redistribution of microgrid energy. This so-called “intelligent grid” is an early example of IoT functionality.
There is a definite need for better identity management on the web. The ability to verify your identity is the lynchpin of financial transactions that happen online. However, remedies for the security risks that come with web commerce are imperfect at best. Distributed ledgers offer enhanced methods for proving who you are, along with the possibility to digitize personal documents. Having a secure identity will also be important for online interactions — for instance, in the sharing economy. A good reputation, after all, is the most important condition for conducting transactions online.
Developing digital identity standards is proving to be a highly complex process. Technical challenges aside, a universal online identity solution requires cooperation between private entities and government. Add to that the need to navigate legal systems in different countries and the problem becomes exponentially difficult. E Commerce on the internet currently relies on the SSL certificate (the little green lock) for secure transactions on the web. Netki is a startup that aspires to create a SSL standard for the blockchain. Having recently announced a $3.5 million seed round, Netki expects a product launch in early 2017.
AML and KYC
Anti-money laundering (AML) and know your customer (KYC) practices have a strong potential for being adapted to the blockchain. Currently, financial institutions must perform a labour intensive multi-step process for each new customer. KYC costs could be reduced through cross-institution client verification, and at the same time increase monitoring and analysis effectiveness.
Startup Polycoin has an AML/KYC solution that involves analyzing transactions. Those transactions identified as being suspicious are forwarded on to compliance officers. Another startup Tradle is developing an application called Trust in Motion (TiM). Characterized as an “Instagram for KYC”, TiM allows customers to take a snapshot of key documents (passport, utility bill, etc.). Once verified by the bank, this data is cryptographically stored on the blockchain.
Today, in exchange for their personal data people can use social media platforms like Facebook for free. In future, users will have the ability to manage and sell the data their online activity generates. Because it can be easily distributed in small fractional amounts, Bitcoin — or something like it — will most likely be the currency that gets used for this type of transaction.
The MIT project Enigma understands that user privacy is the key precondition for creating of a personal data marketplace. Enigma uses cryptographic techniques to allow individual data sets to be split between nodes, and at the same time run bulk computations over the data group as a whole. Fragmenting the data also makes Enigma scalable (unlike those blockchain solutions where data gets replicated on every node). A Beta launch is promised within the next six months.
Land title registration
As Publicly-accessible ledgers, blockchains can make all kinds of record-keeping more efficient. Property titles are a case in point. They tend to be susceptible to fraud, as well as costly and labour intensive to administer.
A number of countries are undertaking blockchain-based land registry projects. Honduras was the first government to announce such an initiative in 2015, although the current status of that project is unclear. This year, the Republic of Georgia cemented a deal with the Bitfury Group to develop a blockchain system for property titles. Reportedly, Hernando de Soto, the high profile economist and property rights advocate, will be advising on the project. Most recently, Sweden announced it was experimenting with a blockchain application for property titles.
The potential for added efficiency in share settlement makes a strong use case for blockchains in stock trading. When executed peer-to-peer, trade confirmations become almost instantaneous (as opposed to taking three days for clearance). Potentially, this means intermediaries — such as the clearing house, auditors and custodians — get removed from the process.
Numerous stock and commodities exchanges are prototyping blockchain applications for the services they offer, including the ASX (Australian Securities Exchange), the Deutsche Börse (Frankfurt’s stock exchange) and the JPX (Japan Exchange Group). Most high profile because the acknowledged first mover in the area, is the Nasdaq’s Linq, a platform for private market trading (typically between pre-IPO startups and investors). A partnership with the blockchain tech company Chain, Linq announced the completion of it its first share trade in 2015. More recently, Nasdaq announced the development of a trial blockchain project for proxy voting on the Estonian Stock Market.
This text commissioned by http://blockgeeks.com/ September 2016.
View original at What is Blockchain Technology? A Step-by-Step Guide For Beginners
July 29, 2016 § Leave a comment
The online school bridges the gap between legacy institutions and new knowledge production
03/02 2016 One reason I like the New Centre for Research & Practice is the way it constructs itself out of tools made available by the internet. Implicitly, even the school’s chosen moniker, the New Centre, suggests what potential gets realized through the use of this context. A school in pragmatic terms, the project is also an embedded reflection on what kind of capacity the network creates. Registered in the State of Michigan (under the category of a Licensed Proprietary School) the non-profit offers graduate-level certificates, along with a range of related on and off-line activities. Started in the Fall of 2014, the New Centre has quickly established itself as a presence, in part due to pent up demand brick and mortar institutions have been slow to meet. However, in this conversation the curator and artist, Mohammad Salemy, one of the school’s three co-founders, makes clear their mission is not oppositional but supplementary to educational resources provided by traditional institutions. With a big shout out to Google docs, the web app Mohammad and I used to conduct this discussion over the last two weeks.
Rosemary Heather (RH): Can you talk about the origins of this project?
Mohammad Salemy (MS): The New Centre was established due to a common interest amongst its founders — myself, Jason Adams and Tony Yanick — in philosophy and theory, in particular their contemporary and emerging forms. We wanted to see how these new approaches could be put to work in a variety of disciplines, with a special emphasis on the arts, technology, and politics. We shared a desire for new intellectual spaces, and new forms of research and development in these new areas of thought. We first focused on online seminars. These are taught face-to-face via Google Hangouts, for video conferencing, and Google Classroom, a platform for maintaining classroom environments. Later on, we opened a new focus on research and publishing, including ten different research groups on the areas of accelerationism, the anthropocene, new art, new music, postcapitalism, and poststatism. Our approach is to identify groundbreaking research agendas and bring together the people central to their development with students and scholars seeking to take their work in new directions. Our publishing platform &&& (tripleampresand.org) publishes the results and disseminates other works by The New Centre community.
RH: Since the Kunsthalle Wien planned their Political Populism exhibition late in 2014, the tendency has only become more pronounced, in Europe and the US. We could say the solution populist politicians offer to a perceived crisis of legitimacy is dubious, but it’s an authentic channeling of discontent nonetheless. Can I draw an analogy here? Can the New Centre for Research & Practice be said to be similarly providing an alternative to an academic establishment perceived to be at an impasse?
MS: If anything, our collective operations at The New Centre can be said to represent a form of academic populism. This can only be accurate if we redefine our understanding of the notions of pop and popular. We are popular to the extent that the increasingly youthful face of our academic world — for instance, the average age of those attending PhD programs has dropped dramatically in the last two decades — demands forms of knowledge that are in tune with the contemporary world, not just politically but also in terms of epistemology. We organize seminars, events and activities that bring new thinkers, scholars and artists to a global audience using available web technologies as the Centre’s physical and institutional platforms. Given the popularity of everything digital and networked these days, and of social media in particular, we are also popular because we operate out of this virtual space rather than depend on traditional educational infrastructure like a campus, studios, etc. However, unlike the movements associated with para academia, we see ourselves as a fluid space which surrounds and extends, rather than opposes, the capabilities of traditional academic institutions. Our objective is to legitimize newer forms of knowledge through our collaborative work with universities, colleges, and other physical institutions like galleries and museums. We think these institutions, despite their material and political limitations still provide an irreplaceable set of tools and valuable networks for the advancement of new discourses that are yet to be canonized. Most of our members and students are already connected to universities and other institutions as professors, graduate students, researchers or artists. They come to us because they find our services a necessary complement to what they otherwise pursue in their own work.
RH: It seems accurate to call The New Centre a decentralized initiative. On your website, you talk about “accelerating academia” and “ecologizing knowledge.” Both concepts can be described as capacities of the network. What effects do you see resulting from the project specifically due to the platform you are working from?
MS: Not only are we more decentralized than other educational platforms, but we are also intent on becoming even more decentralized as we grow. First of all myself and my cofounders, Jason and Tony, are geographically dispersed, often residing in different parts of the world. For the longest time, until Machines that Matter our collaborative conference with e-flux in New York (December 2014), we had not even met in person and had done everything via the internet, from registering The New Centre as a school in Michigan to setting up various service accounts with government and private entities. In regards to accelerating academia and ecologizing knowledge, the key is in having an ear for what is emerging from inside and outside of academia, and shortening the feedback loop through which the works of the younger generation of researchers and graduates become validated and available to others who are pursuing higher level education. On the practical level, we see the school lending a hand to those who might have remained outside the academic gates by upgrading their knowledge and skills and helping them enter the academic world faster. What we mean by ecologizing knowledge is a networked process in which the seminars, syllabuses and assignments will find new ramifications outside of the classroom. To facilitate this, we try to connect our educational services to other activities inside and outside The New Centre. This is a process through which not only a new knowledge but also a new environment for its reception and evaluation is constructed, basically through networks established via the interactions between the wider internet and the institution.
RH: “Shaping the future” is one of the stated goals of the school. Is this in respect of an ideal of progressive politics? What set of political ideas frame The New Centre project?
MS: Jason and Tony come from other trajectories, and also we tend to have both overlapping and diverging point of views in relation to politics. Perhaps what unites our political horizon is the faith we have in the collective human capacity for self improvement via human and non-human technologies, both on the singular and collective levels. For myself, the political dimension of The New Centre is encapsulated in a term I have been using lately: “epistopolitics.” As far as political economy is concerned, an accelerationist project like The New Centre can never be merely political, but can perhaps be epistopolitical. In my opinion, political emancipation can only be possible as a result of an intense epistemological revolution that transforms the entire social fabric, including the outlook of the capitalist class, and a complete revamping of the structures and processes that constitute contemporary liberal democracies. Epistopolitics describes the entanglement of politics with the theory of knowledge and vice versa, which instead of restating Foucault’s position on the relationship between knowledge and power (i.e., knowledge is political) shows how truth, or more precisely the production of knowledge, can only be emancipatory if the trajectory of its politics is also emancipatory. This means an emancipatory political project will be doomed to fail if it remains untouched by a transformation of the existing theories of knowledge. Epistopolitics is the ultimate politics, which consists of producing a knowledge that uses both the critical (negative) and constructive (positive) forms of looking at the world to secure qualitative gains in the general production of knowledge towards collective emancipation.
RH: British political philosopher John Gray said recently that our best thinking today is happening in mainstream culture, not the academy. He cited as an example the way certain TV series (Breaking Bad, for instance) are able to dramatize ethical contradictions. I agree; it’s hard not to notice the many ways that mainstream culture is progressive. How do you then position a project like The New Centre, with its commitment to advanced political and philosophical thinking? Is the model of the avant-garde relevant?
MS: It is impossible to define a contemporary ontology for an avant-garde carved out of its history and actuality from the 20th century. If we forgo ontology and instead identify an avant-garde based on its process and function, then I think it is possible to talk about The New Centre as an avant-garde project. The difference is that in the traditional definition of the term, innovation and radicality is articulated through the 20th century metaphor of war and confrontation that imagines the avant-garde in the front line of political and cultural battles. For us, if there is any avant-garde, it must be found as isolated and dispersed elements and entities within the larger universe of social, artistic, political and scientific fields and institutions. The New Centre can claim this mantle by being both the agent of cohesion, bringing these elements together, and vehicles for navigation, using networked resources to move the whole operation, and not just its front rows, forward.
RH: How do you reconcile the work you do at the The New Centre with your work as a curator and practicing artist?
MS: Even in the strictest definition of the term “curatorial,” the work of a curator already includes the creation of public education programs in relation to other activities of the museum or gallery, like exhibitions. In my case, the collaboration with Jason and Tony began as a result of working together on the Incredible Machines conference, which was a curatorial initiative I undertook in 2013–14 culminating in a part real/part virtual gathering of thinkers, scholars and artists around the themes of computation and cybernetics. Respectively, our work at The New Centre is at least partially — if not completely — curatorial. It takes curatorial skills to compose a virtual institution of learning out of digital bits and parts that are generated on different platforms. So much of managing our virtual institution has to do with maintaining its virtual interface on a regular basis, like an ongoing exhibition of interdisciplinary work with parts being operational separately but also together as a whole. If at the end of the day the function of a good exhibition or another kind of curatorial project is to bring people together and generate questions, conversations — and possibly plans of action — around a theme or concern, I think one can see how what we do at The New Centre overlaps with the activities of any rigorous curatorial team.
It’s also interesting to talk about my practice as an artist, which itself is a cross between curatorial and conceptual practices. In recent years my work has involved taking large data sets extracted from technological platforms like Google, social media, or archived live television broadcasts, and using them to create novel and critical forms of cybernetics involving humans and machines. In this way, I see an overlap between working as an artist, a curator or a programmer at The New Centre.
Mohammad Salemy is an independent NYC/Vancouver-based critic and curator from Iran. He has curated exhibitions at the Koerner Gallery and AMS Gallery at the University of British Columbia, as well as the Satellite Gallery and Dadabase. He co-curated Faces exhibition at the Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery. In 2014, Salemy organized the Incredible Machines conference in Vancouver. Salemy holds a masters degree in Critical and Curatorial Studies from the University of British Columbia.
This is one of ten posts written to accompany the Kunsthalle Wien’s Political Populism exhibition (November 11, 2015 – February 2, 2016).
August 5, 2011 § Leave a comment
Miles Collyer makes felt flags based on images he finds online. Few works of art convey ideas about the world we live in so effectively. Today, a flag could stand for the frivolity of a regatta, or the half-serious declaration of micro-nationhood. Collyer chooses to focus instead on symbols of political conflict; flags that express the statehood aspirations of disenfranchised groups. In the single video he showed at Toronto’s G Gallery, Collyer painted a pennant black and animated it, making the felt triangle appear menacing. It was the only flag that flew in the show, and it clearly announced what territory Collyer wants to claim as his native ground.
We live in a world where images condense territories, which is also a good definition of the Internet. Recreating found images as life-sized replicas in felt, Collyer takes particular interest in the distortions that data transmission brings. Working from digital files, Collyer matches the crudity of pixelation with his chosen material’s lack of finesse. With meticulous care, he sews chunky, abstract artworks. The ripples of a flag that once flapped in the wind are given form as a layered, two-dimensional object. The result is eerie: the flag’s distortions lack detail, and thus take on the contours of a topographical map. Subjected to a multi-step process of translation, Collyer’s works continue to convey a message about their origins. The effect is an uncanny one, which brings to mind the Surrealists’ belief that they could find beauty and truth in a flea market.
Collyer trained as a photographer, and this work is ultimately an investigation into the power of the photographic image. In a previous series of photographs, Collyer confronted this issue directly. He took portraits of himself wearing a variety of coloured knit balaclavas he had found in thrift stores. Even when styled as a fashion statement, the balaclava speaks the language of political insurgency. The images Collyer made cannot escape this implication; they draw resonance from the idiom of 21st-century terrorism.
With his flag series, Collyer looks at the politics of the image from a different angle. The innocuousness of felt neutralizes the political flag, and yet its message remains undiluted. This is not because his audience knows much about the political struggles of, say, the people, whose flag Collyer has used as source material. Rather, it is because the picture frame flattens and condenses information into form. Flag symbolism is cultural expression at its most basic or, dare I say, primitive; this is why Collyer can create soft, distorted versions of the real thing and still find that they pack a powerful, atavistic punch.
By Rosemary Heather