No subject
Wed Dec 14 14:22:51 EST 2011
stallations. Many of them explored the creation of synthetic images (abstra=
ct ones) by the manipulation of rays of TV tubes=2C questioning the indexic=
ality of technical image. They also do hacking on devices (audio and video=
tapes=2C cameras=2C TV monitors etc) to consider other operating logics of =
media devices. They already have used sensors attached to the videotapes an=
d cameras.
But that does not mean that we do today is the same thing they did. The que=
stions they addressed have been continuously updated and were joined by oth=
ers that occur in the field of media networking=2C mobile devices=2C gaming=
and many other fields.
> Date: Sun=2C 12 Feb 2012 11:06:36 +0000
> From: marc.garrett at furtherfield.org
> To: empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] ambiguous artistic strategies & critical engineer=
ing
>=20
> -----------I just realised that yesterday=2C I sent this post to Julian=20
> personally rather than to the Empyre list by mistake.
>=20
> Sorry Julian=2C here it is again resent to its correct location :-)
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Hi Julian=2C
>=20
> Excuse my late interaction with the list regarding its current=20
> discussion - as usual too much going on. But=2C I'm happy to be=20
> (momentarily) distracted and jump in here to explore some of the aspects=
=20
> or key elements you have proposed in your last post...
>=20
> Within your manifesto you say "The Critical Engineer looks beyond the=20
> 'awe of implementation' to determine methods of influence and their=20
> specific effects."
>=20
> Now=2C the implementation of building a manifesto has its own reflective=
=20
> 'awe'=2C in which we acknowledge not only the subject but the writer(s) a=
t=20
> the same time. I am wondering whether we need to re-consider particular=20
> nuances of habit in relation to the creation of manifestos?
>=20
> For instance defining the differences of 'one or a group' amongst=20
> others=2C through the implementation of a manifesto creates its own=20
> meta-rules. It becomes about the manifesto as self (and peer)=20
> initiation=2C psychologically=2C socially and defining a particular statu=
s.
>=20
> What is the message beyond the language itself if we consider the=20
> function within a social context=2C and what are the borders it redefines=
=20
> and who is it really for?
>=20
> Is it rather a behaviour statement and perhaps not a manifesto=2C or both=
=20
> (and more)?
>=20
> Just interested :-)
>=20
> Wishing you well.
>=20
> marc
> > ..on Thu=2C Feb 09=2C 2012 at 03:18:06PM +0000=2C Simon Biggs wrote:
> >> Much contemporary computer based art work has a cargo-cult like=20
> >> quality due to
> >> such illiteracy. This can be interesting but usually in spite of itsel=
f.
> > Indeed=2C also one of the fruits of Bricolage. However with a language =
like
> > Engineering having such influence over the lives and minds of people -=
=20
> > how we
> > eat=2C travel=2C communicate - I really think you need to speak the=20
> > language to
> > truly act critically within its scope.
> >
> > This is what we sought to underscore in the manifesto:
> >
> > http://criticalengineering.org
> >
> > I've talked to several artists that have expressed disempowerment in=20
> > this age of
> > database automation=2C google maps=2C wireless networking=2C the Cloud =
etc -
> > technologies that shape how they live and even their practice yet they=
=20
> > find no
> > entry point to dissassembling and thus critically engaging them. It's=20
> > not enough
> > to talk about how we are influenced by all this engineering -=20
> > technology that
> > becomes social=2C political and cultural infrastructure - this leaves u=
s=20
> > in little
> > better position. It must be engaged it directly to understand the=20
> > mechanics of
> > influence. This is the difference between a topic (technology) and as=20
> > a material
> > (engineering).
> >
> > Most that receive this email will have little or no idea how it=20
> > arrived to their
> > inbox=2C unable to accurately describe it to another=2C not even close.=
At=20
> > the same
> > time most would be able to describe how a postcard arrived at their=20
> > friends
> > mailbox. Just 15 years..
> >
> > Ignorance as to how these engineered infrastructures actually=20
> > function=2C what
> > they do and what is done with them behind their own presentation=2C is=
=20
> > actively
> > being abused both inside and out of democracies.
> >
> > Cheers=2C
> >
> > Julian
> >
> >> On 9 Feb 2012=2C at 13:44=2C C=E9sar Baio wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hallo all=2C
> >>>
> >>> It is interesting because this remains a field of questions for me.
> >>> But I can talk a bit about my experience with this.
> >>>
> >>> When it comes to technology=2C you look different when you know the=20
> >>> device from it inside. It makes me think too much on the importance=20
> >>> of clearing the black box claimed by Flusser. So think of a culture=20
> >>> in which people produce technology as nowadays they produce text and=
=20
> >>> images. It leads to reformulation of the concept of technology. I=20
> >>> think this is an immense power of the empirical point of view=20
> >>> because for those who can operate with the technology has in your=20
> >>> hand a very powerful language. We say "programming language" but why=
=20
> >>> not to say something like "technological language"?. Who understands=
=20
> >>> the language written by programmers is the computer=2C but he does so=
=20
> >>> only to turn it into other languages.
> >>>
> >>> In the theoretical aspect=2C for example=2C at various times I am led=
to=20
> >>> take my technical background and compare it with aesthetic aspects.=20
> >>> An example of this happened in a part of my dissertation I put some=20
> >>> questions to some arguments used by Manovich when he relates film=20
> >>> and digital. My background in video gave me important clues for me=20
> >>> to understand that digital is much more closely related to the video=
=20
> >>> than to the film. Not by chance this relationship feels very=20
> >>> strongly also in the aesthetic field. It comprehension changed a lot=
=20
> >>> the way deals the other problems of my thesis.
> >>>
> >>> I find these very thought-provoking issues. I'm very curious as to=20
> >>> how each of the people who cross these areas deals with these=20
> >>> issues. To me it would be fascinating to hear other people on the=20
> >>> forum.
> >>>
> >>>> From: gabriel.menotti at gmail.com
> >>>> Date: Wed=2C 8 Feb 2012 09:59:37 +0000
> >>>> To: empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >>>> Subject: [-empyre-] ambiguous artistic strategies& critical=20
> >>>> engineering
> >>>>
> >>>> Hey!
> >>>>
> >>>>> my first area of study was the electronics=2C and I
> >>>>> think that today this has much influence on what I have written=20
> >>>>> and on my
> >>>>> experimental projects. [C=E9sar Baio]
> >>>> Being fascinated by the way some programmers write about software=2C=
I=92d
> >>>> be very curious to see what kind of insights this technical backgrou=
nd
> >>>> provides to your research. Are these overt influences or more subtle
> >>>> ones? Could you please give some examples =96 either theoretical or
> >>>> empirical?
> >>>>
> >>>> Also=2C do you see some coherence in the way you move from one field=
=20
> >>>> to another?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'm interested in if
> >>>>> and how artistic practice can reformulate the concept of=20
> >>>>> technology making
> >>>>> their production and use more accessible=2C how are different (and=
=20
> >>>>> ambiguous)
> >>>>> the strategies that the artist uses [CB]
> >>>> Julian Oliver=92s appeal for a =93critical engineering=94 comes to m=
ind here
> >>>> (there was a debate about it on empyre on July =9211=2C moderated by=
Simon
> >>>> and Magnus). Do you think there is anything particular in artistic
> >>>> practice that allow it to employ ambiguous strategies=2C or would th=
ese
> >>>> strategies be within the reach of anyone =96 such as academic
> >>>> researchers or technicians? Otherwise=2C shouldn=92t they?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best!
> >>>> Menotti
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> empyre forum
> >>>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >>>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> empyre forum
> >>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>
> >> Simon Biggs
> >> simon at littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK=20
> >> skype: simonbiggsuk
> >>
> >> s.biggs at ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art=2C University of Edinburgh
> >> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/=20
> >> http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> empyre forum
> >> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Other Info:
>=20
> Furtherfield - A living=2C breathing=2C thriving network
> http://www.furtherfield.org - for art=2C technology and social change=20
> since 1997
>=20
> Also - Furtherfield Gallery& Social Space:
> http://www.furtherfield.org/gallery
>=20
> About Furtherfield:
> http://www.furtherfield.org/content/about
>=20
> Netbehaviour - Networked Artists List Community.
> http://www.netbehaviour.org
>=20
> http://identi.ca/furtherfield
> http://twitter.com/furtherfield
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
=
--_0cb147fe-889c-4a11-bd10-710b42ecef85_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt=3B
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>
<br>GH:<br>The main idea of video is a live broadcast or a disjuncture of p=
lace/space so your initial premise seems correct to me. =3B However=2C =
video is just one of the multimedia components of digital art/media. =
=3B For example. data sensors=2C audio I/O<br>video=2C stills=2C photoshop=
=2C hacking=2C animation=2C video mapping onto 3D=2C virtual worlds etc.. a=
ll hold equal value. =3B Obviously we're talking/working in an informat=
ion world.<br><br>Cesar:<br>In my opinion=2C with the digital media we are =
living in a technical=2C aesthetic and artistic context very different from=
the 1970s and 1980s video art. I agree with you that digital is not the sa=
me as video. What I mean is that=2C although I agree with many of the relat=
ionships established by Manivich between film and digital=2C I believe the =
video has a more intimate relationship with the digital. Briefly=2C only to=
exemplify=2C from the point of view of the technology=2C although in an an=
alogue way=2C <br>video was based on the light measurement by numbers. The =
video already used sampling techniques. It had an information processing sy=
stem. It was based on some kinds of virtualities - such as size and color b=
alance of the pixel (on the lines) of camera / TV / monitor.<br>From the ae=
sthetic point of view=2C many video artists in the 70's and 80's have based=
their work on the creation of apparatus in the form of video installations=
. Many of them explored the creation of synthetic images (abstract ones) by=
the manipulation of rays of TV tubes=2C questioning the indexicality of te=
chnical image. =3B They also do hacking on devices (audio and videotape=
s=2C cameras=2C TV monitors etc) to consider other operating logics of medi=
a devices. They already have used sensors attached to the videotapes and ca=
meras.<br>But that does not mean that we do today is the same thing they di=
d. The questions they addressed have been continuously updated and were joi=
ned by others that occur in the field of media networking=2C mobile devices=
=2C gaming and many other fields.<br><br><br><br><br><br><div><div id=3D"Sk=
yDrivePlaceholder"></div>>=3B Date: Sun=2C 12 Feb 2012 11:06:36 +0000<br>=
>=3B From: marc.garrett at furtherfield.org<br>>=3B To: empyre at lists.cofa.=
unsw.edu.au<br>>=3B Subject: Re: [-empyre-] ambiguous artistic strategies=
&=3B critical engineering<br>>=3B <br>>=3B -----------I just realis=
ed that yesterday=2C I sent this post to Julian <br>>=3B personally rathe=
r than to the Empyre list by mistake.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Sorry Julian=2C =
here it is again resent to its correct location :-)<br>>=3B <br>>=3B <b=
r>>=3B <br>>=3B Hi Julian=2C<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Excuse my late intera=
ction with the list regarding its current <br>>=3B discussion - as usual =
too much going on. But=2C I'm happy to be <br>>=3B (momentarily) distract=
ed and jump in here to explore some of the aspects <br>>=3B or key elemen=
ts you have proposed in your last post...<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Within your =
manifesto you say "The Critical Engineer looks beyond the <br>>=3B 'awe o=
f implementation' to determine methods of influence and their <br>>=3B sp=
ecific effects."<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Now=2C the implementation of building=
a manifesto has its own reflective <br>>=3B 'awe'=2C in which we acknowl=
edge not only the subject but the writer(s) at <br>>=3B the same time. I =
am wondering whether we need to re-consider particular <br>>=3B nuances o=
f habit in relation to the creation of manifestos?<br>>=3B <br>>=3B For=
instance defining the differences of 'one or a group' amongst <br>>=3B o=
thers=2C through the implementation of a manifesto creates its own <br>>=
=3B meta-rules. It becomes about the manifesto as self (and peer) <br>>=
=3B initiation=2C psychologically=2C socially and defining a particular sta=
tus.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B What is the message beyond the language itself if=
we consider the <br>>=3B function within a social context=2C and what ar=
e the borders it redefines <br>>=3B and who is it really for?<br>>=3B <=
br>>=3B Is it rather a behaviour statement and perhaps not a manifesto=2C=
or both <br>>=3B (and more)?<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Just interested :-)<br=
>>=3B <br>>=3B Wishing you well.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B marc<br>>=3B &g=
t=3B ..on Thu=2C Feb 09=2C 2012 at 03:18:06PM +0000=2C Simon Biggs wrote:<b=
r>>=3B >=3B>=3B Much contemporary computer based art work has a cargo=
-cult like <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B quality due to<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B su=
ch illiteracy. This can be interesting but usually in spite of itself.<br>&=
gt=3B >=3B Indeed=2C also one of the fruits of Bricolage. However with a =
language like<br>>=3B >=3B Engineering having such influence over the l=
ives and minds of people - <br>>=3B >=3B how we<br>>=3B >=3B eat=2C=
travel=2C communicate - I really think you need to speak the <br>>=3B &g=
t=3B language to<br>>=3B >=3B truly act critically within its scope.<br=
>>=3B >=3B<br>>=3B >=3B This is what we sought to underscore in the=
manifesto:<br>>=3B >=3B<br>>=3B >=3B http://criticalengineering.or=
g<br>>=3B >=3B<br>>=3B >=3B I've talked to several artists that hav=
e expressed disempowerment in <br>>=3B >=3B this age of<br>>=3B >=
=3B database automation=2C google maps=2C wireless networking=2C the Cloud =
etc -<br>>=3B >=3B technologies that shape how they live and even their=
practice yet they <br>>=3B >=3B find no<br>>=3B >=3B entry point t=
o dissassembling and thus critically engaging them. It's <br>>=3B >=3B =
not enough<br>>=3B >=3B to talk about how we are influenced by all this=
engineering - <br>>=3B >=3B technology that<br>>=3B >=3B becomes s=
ocial=2C political and cultural infrastructure - this leaves us <br>>=3B =
>=3B in little<br>>=3B >=3B better position. It must be engaged it di=
rectly to understand the <br>>=3B >=3B mechanics of<br>>=3B >=3B in=
fluence. This is the difference between a topic (technology) and as <br>>=
=3B >=3B a material<br>>=3B >=3B (engineering).<br>>=3B >=3B<br>&=
gt=3B >=3B Most that receive this email will have little or no idea how i=
t <br>>=3B >=3B arrived to their<br>>=3B >=3B inbox=2C unable to ac=
curately describe it to another=2C not even close. At <br>>=3B >=3B the=
same<br>>=3B >=3B time most would be able to describe how a postcard a=
rrived at their <br>>=3B >=3B friends<br>>=3B >=3B mailbox. Just 15=
years..<br>>=3B >=3B<br>>=3B >=3B Ignorance as to how these engine=
ered infrastructures actually <br>>=3B >=3B function=2C what<br>>=3B =
>=3B they do and what is done with them behind their own presentation=2C =
is <br>>=3B >=3B actively<br>>=3B >=3B being abused both inside and=
out of democracies.<br>>=3B >=3B<br>>=3B >=3B Cheers=2C<br>>=3B =
>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B Julian<br>>=3B >=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B On 9=
Feb 2012=2C at 13:44=2C C=E9sar Baio wrote:<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=
=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B Hallo all=2C<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B =
>=3B>=3B>=3B It is interesting because this remains a field of questi=
ons for me.<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B But I can talk a bit about my expe=
rience with this.<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B=
When it comes to technology=2C you look different when you know the <br>&g=
t=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B device from it inside. It makes me think too much o=
n the importance <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B of clearing the black box cl=
aimed by Flusser. So think of a culture <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B in wh=
ich people produce technology as nowadays they produce text and <br>>=3B =
>=3B>=3B>=3B images. It leads to reformulation of the concept of tech=
nology. I <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B think this is an immense power of t=
he empirical point of view <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B because for those =
who can operate with the technology has in your <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=
=3B hand a very powerful language. We say "programming language" but why <b=
r>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B not to say something like "technological langua=
ge"?. Who understands <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B the language written by=
programmers is the computer=2C but he does so <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=
=3B only to turn it into other languages.<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B<br>&=
gt=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B In the theoretical aspect=2C for example=2C at var=
ious times I am led to <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B take my technical back=
ground and compare it with aesthetic aspects. <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B=
An example of this happened in a part of my dissertation I put some <br>&g=
t=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B questions to some arguments used by Manovich when h=
e relates film <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B and digital. My background in =
video gave me important clues for me <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B to under=
stand that digital is much more closely related to the video <br>>=3B >=
=3B>=3B>=3B than to the film. Not by chance this relationship feels ver=
y <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B strongly also in the aesthetic field. It co=
mprehension changed a lot <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B the way deals the o=
ther problems of my thesis.<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B&g=
t=3B>=3B I find these very thought-provoking issues. I'm very curious as =
to <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B how each of the people who cross these are=
as deals with these <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B issues. To me it would be=
fascinating to hear other people on the <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B foru=
m.<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B From: ga=
briel.menotti at gmail.com<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B Date: Wed=2C 8 F=
eb 2012 09:59:37 +0000<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B To: empyre at lists.=
cofa.unsw.edu.au<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B Subject: [-empyre-] amb=
iguous artistic strategies&=3B critical <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=
=3B engineering<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B&g=
t=3B>=3B Hey!<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B&g=
t=3B>=3B>=3B my first area of study was the electronics=2C and I<br>>=
=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B think that today this has much influence=
on what I have written <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B and on my=
<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B experimental projects. [C=E9sar B=
aio]<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B Being fascinated by the way some pr=
ogrammers write about software=2C I=92d<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B =
be very curious to see what kind of insights this technical background<br>&=
gt=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B provides to your research. Are these overt i=
nfluences or more subtle<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B ones? Could you=
please give some examples =96 either theoretical or<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B=
>=3B>=3B empirical?<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B=
>=3B>=3B>=3B Also=2C do you see some coherence in the way you move fr=
om one field <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B to another?<br>>=3B >=
=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B&g=
t=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B I'm interested in if<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=
=3B>=3B and how artistic practice can reformulate the concept of <br>>=
=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B technology making<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B=
>=3B>=3B>=3B their production and use more accessible=2C how are diff=
erent (and <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B ambiguous)<br>>=3B &=
gt=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B the strategies that the artist uses [CB]<br>&=
gt=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B Julian Oliver=92s appeal for a =93critical e=
ngineering=94 comes to mind here<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B (there =
was a debate about it on empyre on July =9211=2C moderated by Simon<br>>=
=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B and Magnus). Do you think there is anything pa=
rticular in artistic<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B practice that allow=
it to employ ambiguous strategies=2C or would these<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B=
>=3B>=3B strategies be within the reach of anyone =96 such as academic<=
br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B researchers or technicians? Otherwise=2C=
shouldn=92t they?<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=
=3B>=3B>=3B Best!<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B Menotti<br>>=3B =
>=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B _______________________________________________<br=
>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B empyre forum<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B&=
gt=3B empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B>=3B http=
://www.subtle.net/empyre<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B _____________________=
__________________________<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B empyre forum<br>>=
=3B >=3B>=3B>=3B empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B=
>=3B http://www.subtle.net/empyre<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B=
>=3B Simon Biggs<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B simon at littlepig.org.uk http://www=
.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B skype: simonbiggsu=
k<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B s.biggs at ed.ac.uk Edinburgh =
College of Art=2C University of Edinburgh<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B http://www=
.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ <br>>=3B >=3B>=3B http://ww=
w.movingtargets.co.uk/<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=
=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B ____________=
___________________________________<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B empyre forum<br>=
>=3B >=3B>=3B empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B ht=
tp://www.subtle.net/empyre<br>>=3B <br>>=3B <br>>=3B -- <br>>=3B Ot=
her Info:<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Furtherfield - A living=2C breathing=2C thri=
ving network<br>>=3B http://www.furtherfield.org - for art=2C technology =
and social change <br>>=3B since 1997<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Also - Further=
field Gallery&=3B Social Space:<br>>=3B http://www.furtherfield.org/ga=
llery<br>>=3B <br>>=3B About Furtherfield:<br>>=3B http://www.further=
field.org/content/about<br>>=3B <br>>=3B Netbehaviour - Networked Artis=
ts List Community.<br>>=3B http://www.netbehaviour.org<br>>=3B <br>>=
=3B http://identi.ca/furtherfield<br>>=3B http://twitter.com/furtherfield=
<br>>=3B <br>>=3B _______________________________________________<br>&g=
t=3B empyre forum<br>>=3B empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au<br>>=3B http://=
www.subtle.net/empyre<br></div> </div></body>
</html>=
--_0cb147fe-889c-4a11-bd10-710b42ecef85_--
More information about the empyre
mailing list