[NetBehaviour] TOKENOMICS Re: comments on blockchain, art, etc., discussion with Ruth

Tue Nov 7 04:07:25 CET 2017

Spam. "Blockchain is our mesh-odology"? "fine art is now fin-art" This guy
deserves to be pinned to a wall and framed.

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM Kenneth Fields via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> My interest in blockchain is something of an attention filter.
> It’s like moving house; you have to go through all your stuff
> and box up only the things you NEED to bring with you; facebook,
> youtube, twitter - get rid of it.
>
> We can simply move completely over to the next web, and as a
> consequence reclaim some of the old passion of the early internet.
> Time to build again; scout ahead.
>
> Artsmesh (http://artsmesh.com) was always meant to be decentralized,
> and we achieved that goal partially - embedding gnuSocial as a repository,
> but for the most part keep it focused on LIVE. With blockchain, it’s now
> “Buy Live.”
>
> So Artsmesh is ‘banking' on the fact that the 'live event horizon' (NOW)
> will become a site of value.
> In other words, the closer you are to live/now, the more valuable and
> trusted will be the ‘signal.’
> Live media acts as another filter, because it's a more skill-intensive
> space to command.
> With live presence, we share a more direct signal path; there is a
> relationship of veridicality, where
> no mediating entity can insinuate their non-contractual influence between
> our two negotiated presences.
>
> So those are two filters acting on my psyche, blockchain and live. But yet
> another filter
> seems to be emerging, a strange movement of cutting edge research from
> academia
> to finance! Who would of thunk it? The white papers are exciting and ground
> breaking, unlike the quicksand of much of the recent academic discourse in
> the arts and tech.
>
> So Artsmesh is currently on the DApp/move:
> https://www.stateofthedapps.com/dapps/artsmesh
>
> We’ll blockchain our mesh-odology (currently server based), and track
> peers as bitcoin/ethereum does,
> issue shared IP contracts between musicians and audience at the point of
> hitting the broadcast button,
> and gradually move to decentralized storage, live CDN carrier, governance
> of the Mesh community
> and federated intermeshes (because as easily as you can mint your own
> token, you will be able to mint your own
> blockchain off the Ethereum blockchain) - and as a side effect, we’ll be
> able to financially support and credential
> expertise outside of the old rusty vessels/institutions.
>
> And what about the new language of fine art - its now finArt!
>
> See you on the mesh.
> Ken
>
> Syneme
> Central Conservatory of Music,
> Beijing, China
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2017 18:38:34 +0000
> From: ruth catlow <ruth.catlow at furtherfield.org>
> To: netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> Subject: [NetBehaviour] TOKENOMICS Re:  comments on blockchain, art,
> etc., discussion with Ruth
> Message-ID: <63c23aa6-8f02-d691-ca33-f552529bba76 at furtherfield.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> We can talk about the existence of art on the blockchain as an entry in
> the ledger.
> If there is no entry in a blockchain ledger the art probably does not
> exist or impinge on the blockchain- and so what?!
>
> But I love the introduction of Beuys and Guerrilla Girls to the
> conversation because their "work" purports to  take place in humans
> (transforming them all into artists) and the changing behaviour of systems.
>
> But how do we conceive of what we could call the "core" work in relation
> to the economic life of a Beuys object or installation, and the
> documentation of a Guerrilla Girls action?
>
> Here is a "tokenomics" project under development.
> Could the artist consortium model explored here
> <
> https://medium.com/singulardtv/tokenomics-101-the-emerging-field-of-token-economics-e253b9e72ba3>
>
> work for us?
>
> Bests
> Ruth
>
>
> For entities we are claiming exist outside of the blockchain, the
> data that
> claims to register that existence is a proxy for them. We cannot
> validate
> the correctness of that claim using the blockchain's consensus rules
> in the
> same way we can for a simple value transaction if we wish to validate
> the
> fact of the registered object's existence outside of the blockchain.
> Something about being outside the text. We can only validate that
> person X
> placed a record on the blockchain, and possibly that later they sent
> it to
> person Y.
>
>
> This does seem to relate to the ontology of capital itself.
>
>
> We use such proxies when buying and selling physical property such as
> cars
> or houses, or more pertinently when buying and selling conceptual art.
> Certificates of authenticity for conceptual art are even more
> material than
> blockchain records. But I feel they are still proxies for the work
> rather
> than being the work, although this may just be the conceptual art fan
> in me
> speaking.
>
>
> What I wonder about is in a sense the derailing of conceptual art,
> which was a reaction at the time, at least among many artists, against
> the materialism and mercantilism of the gallery/promotion structure.
> Given that a conceptual work can be incorporated into blockchain,
> which itself is an abstracting, is it necessary then to go into a
> discussion of 'buying and selling conceptual art'? Isn't this a leap
> which many artists, at least at the time, wouldn't make; doesn't it
> reduce conceptualism to the usual marketplace phenomenology, instead
> of the radical gesture that, at least for some, it embodied? For some
> reason Beuys comes to mind - he wasn't a conceptualist, but his
> teaching and art occupied such a radical position - as does the work
> of the Guerrilla Girls etc. ..
>
> Hi
>
>
> - Alan
>
>
> - Rob.
>
>
>
>
> New CD:- LIMIT:
> http://www.publiceyesore.com/catalog.php?pg=3&pit=138
> email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
> web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 718-813-3285 <(718)%20813-3285>
> current text http://www.alansondheim.org/uy.txt
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
>
> --
> Co-founder Co-director
> Furtherfield
>
> www.furtherfield.org
>
> +44 (0) 77370 02879
>
> Bitcoin Address 197BBaXa6M9PtHhhNTQkuHh1pVJA8RrJ2i
>
> Furtherfield is the UK's leading organisation for art shows, labs, &
> debates
> around critical questions in art and technology, since 1997
>
> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company limited by Guarantee
> registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> Registered business address: Ballard Newman, Apex House, Grand Arcade,
> Tally Ho Corner, London N12 0EH.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20171105/87984748/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of NetBehaviour Digest, Vol 17, Issue 1
> *******************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
-- 
P Thayer, Artist
http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20171107/cca048c8/attachment.htm>