[NetBehaviour] NetBehaviour Digest, Vol 1280, Issue 1

Danielle Imara danielleimara at gmail.com
Fri Jun 11 07:27:48 CEST 2021


Re: Going Silent and

I’ve been absent: busy changing countries and having limited connectivity,
and it seems a lot has happened while I was away.

I’m a relative netbehaviour newbie and unsure how I even got to know about
it. I don’t know what it was originally planned to be and so have no idea
if it fulfilled its remit. It has been a great connective thread for me, a
link to interesting people with new ideas, some over my head, which
challenged me to stretch my mind further. It also introduced me to
participation in the brilliant undocumented and impermanence exhibitions,
and members’ art that I now follow and appreciate a lot. Also it’s been a
space where it seemed ok to share some of my work, without feeling it would
be misconstrued as simply self-promotion.

I hope this platform isn’t dissolved, yet accept it, if it must be. I’d be
interested to see how it might change and evolve with relevant prompts.


Alan’s creative flow has been fascinating and I will miss that; Alan if you
are still here, sending you a message of support in a difficult time.


With Love.

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 12:04, <netbehaviour-request at lists.netbehaviour.org>
wrote:

> Send NetBehaviour mailing list submissions to
>         netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         netbehaviour-request at lists.netbehaviour.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         netbehaviour-owner at lists.netbehaviour.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of NetBehaviour digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Solstizio Calvino (Max Herman)
>    2. Re: going silent (Mark Hancock)
>    3. Re: going silent (Annie Abrahams)
>    4. Re: Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities (BishopZ)
>    5. Re: going silent (marc garrett)
>    6. Re: going silent (Ana Vald?s)
>    7. tomorrow's post, Sarangi, other (Alan Sondheim)
>    8. Museum Without Walls - an inventory of virtual museums
>       (Gabriel Menotti)
>    9. Re: Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities (Rhea Myers)
>   10. Re: Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities (Rhea Myers)
>   11. Re: Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities (Rhea Myers)
>   12. Re: Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities (Rhea Myers)
>   13. Re: Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities (Alan Sondheim)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 15:56:16 +0000
> From: Max Herman <maxnmherman at hotmail.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: [NetBehaviour] Solstizio Calvino
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CH2PR15MB4311F49DECF98D84FA24DF70A5369 at CH2PR15MB4311.namprd15.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> This is a project I've been doing annually since June 2018, based on a
> simple set of elements:
>
>   *   Occurs around the time of the summer solstice
>   *   Uses text from Italo Calvino's Six Memos for the Next Millennium
>   *   Uses images from the Hennepin County Public Library Special
> Collection
>   *   Uses images of brain scans from people meditating
>
> The first Solstizio was done for the Calzona Museum in Calzona, USA, which
> is located in a desert area.  The second and third took place in the
> Mississippi River Gorge Regional Park in Minneapolis, MN, and the fourth
> will return to a desert area in the western US.
>
> How to bring the elements together is TBD each year.  Some general themes
> and rubrics I've used have included maps of cities, images of buildings,
> astronomical images, millstones, and various images from anatomy.  To set
> up a location, so that interaction can occur, I've used the basic
> talk/lecture format with images as well as a "stone circle" method.  The
> latter has consisted of a circle of ordinary mass-produced bricks with a
> compass orientation, about 30' across, with the images and texts on slips
> of paper inside the circle so people can pick them up to read or not, keep
> or not, etc.
>
> If you would like a copy of the paper slips for this year please feel free
> to contact me offlist and I can send a PDF.
>
> All best,
>
> Max
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/0d2fbc38/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 17:42:19 +0100
> From: Mark Hancock <mark at memecortex.net>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] going silent
> Message-ID:
>         <CAPBEg=
> sEBeVXTyYNs37Mq48fpTGt8ZVQL5LNUES2WPxrUKcymg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Alan, as always much love and thoughts towards you and the family.
>
> Please continue to post work here. I always welcome your projects that come
> through the list. They inevitably challenge me to think about my own
> creativity, the wider possibilities of what being digital might mean (as
> publication method and artistic medium in varying measures). Your work
> always encourages me to think about my relationship to Buddhism etc through
> the ongoing development of what I laughingly call my creative practice,
> because of your vast knowledge on those subjects.
>
> As for the list itself ? Are we lucky to have various creative people on
> the list? Have you spent years with no interaction with creative people
> outside of reading magazines? Have you ever visited galleries (not
> openings, just galleries, as a ?normal? member of the public) and felt an
> outsider? For me, it?s an absolute heartfelt privilege to have space to
> interact with creative people who have such expansive, challenging ideas
> that make me reach for books, scratch my head, stare in amazement that a
> human brain can think those things. Everyone on this list is interesting
> and welcome in my intellectual /digital life and someone who i would have
> been desperate to speak to in my 20s, as a labourer on building sites,
> being the oddball sitting reading Modern Painters magazine (don?t judge me,
> they were different times!)
>
> We?re all the creative oddballs here, until the accountants take over the
> list. More womxn, more young people, more tenured academics (someone has to
> love ?em!), more wild ideas that take years for some of us to grasp. A few
> more splashes of disagreement over the ethical, environmental impacts of
> work, more nervous ?is this art or not, please!? posts from the seats at
> the back. More space for individuals to realise who they really are or want
> to be.
>
> More. More. More.
>
> But I?m definitely not up for being a moderator. They?re the worst! :-)
>
> Love
> Mark
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 23:20, <pl at voyd.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes, alan, as you are one of the backbones of the community.
> > Hope that it is short.
> > You know I have something similar near me.
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 23:16:18 +0100, Simon Mclennan via NetBehaviour <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> > Alan very sorry to hear this.
> > Keep on! I?m sure you will.
> > All the best,
> > Simon
> >
> > Sent from my spyphone
> >
> > On 8 Jun 2021, at 19:55, Ana Vald?s via NetBehaviour <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Alan I hope your silence should be a short one! And regarding your
> brother
> > sad but mortality is our companion and we need to deal with it.
> > Until I fell sick with serious COVID and stayed one and half month at the
> > Hospital I fell I was inmortal too?
> > I am a changed person now? all the best to you and your brother
> > Ana
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 15:45, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Alan,
> >>
> >> So sorry to hear this.
> >> Wishing the very best to you all.
> >> We will miss you.
> >>
> >> Ruth
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 5:51 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour <
> >> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> I'm going silent on Netbehaviour. My brother has cancer and I'm having
> a
> >>> hard time digesting that.
> >>> These discussions are difficult for me. I can always be reached
> >>> back-channel at sondheim at gmail.com . I'll be posting on Facebook as
> >>> usual and on the smaller lists wryting-l and Cybermind that I moderate.
> >>> Apologies for any disruptions.
> >>> For any announcements, I'd appreciate having my address added to your
> >>> mailing list.
> >>> Of course I'll go along with whatever the list transforms into.
> >>> I need to sleep.
> >>>
> >>> Best to everyone, Alan
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >>> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ruth Catlow
> >> she/her
> >> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised
> Arts
> >> Lab
> >> +44 (0) 77370 02879
> >>
> >> *I will only agree to speak at events that are racially and gender
> >> balanced.
> >>
> >> **sending thanks
> >> <
> https://www.ovoenergy.com/ovo-newsroom/press-releases/2019/november/think-before-you-thank-if-every-brit-sent-one-less-thank-you-email-a-day-we-would-save-16433-tonnes-of-carbon-a-year-the-same-as-81152-flights-to-madrid.html>
> in
> >> advance
> >>
> >> *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
> exhibitions,
> >> labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.
> >> furtherfield.org <http://www.furtherfield.org/>
> >>
> >>
> >> *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> >> technologies research hub
> >>
> >> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.
> >>
> >> decal.is <http://www.decal.is>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee
> >>
> >> Registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> >>
> >> Registered business address: Carbon Accountancy, 80-83 Long Lane,
> >> London, EC1A 9ET
> >> <
> https://www.google.com/maps/search/80-83+Long+Lane,+London,+EC1A+9ET?entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> >> .
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> > --
> > https://anavaldes.wordpress.com/
> > www.twitter.com/caravia158
> > http://www.scoop.it/t/art-and-activism/
> > http://www.scoop.it/t/food-history-and-trivia
> > http://www.scoop.it/t/urbanism-3-0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > cell Sweden +4670-3213370
> > cell Uruguay +598-99470758
> >
> >
> > "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with
> > your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will
> always
> > long to return.
> > ? Leonardo da Vinci
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/c6cc432b/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 20:45:30 +0200
> From: Annie Abrahams <bram.org at gmail.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] going silent
> Message-ID:
>         <CAPYs01kV=
> jtHVQcijfny2ignRXvqd7VKxYbVLgtGFtcAeh2DLA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> love
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:43 PM Mark Hancock <mark at memecortex.net> wrote:
>
> > Alan, as always much love and thoughts towards you and the family.
> >
> > Please continue to post work here. I always welcome your projects that
> > come through the list. They inevitably challenge me to think about my own
> > creativity, the wider possibilities of what being digital might mean (as
> > publication method and artistic medium in varying measures). Your work
> > always encourages me to think about my relationship to Buddhism etc
> through
> > the ongoing development of what I laughingly call my creative practice,
> > because of your vast knowledge on those subjects.
> >
> > As for the list itself ? Are we lucky to have various creative people on
> > the list? Have you spent years with no interaction with creative people
> > outside of reading magazines? Have you ever visited galleries (not
> > openings, just galleries, as a ?normal? member of the public) and felt an
> > outsider? For me, it?s an absolute heartfelt privilege to have space to
> > interact with creative people who have such expansive, challenging ideas
> > that make me reach for books, scratch my head, stare in amazement that a
> > human brain can think those things. Everyone on this list is interesting
> > and welcome in my intellectual /digital life and someone who i would have
> > been desperate to speak to in my 20s, as a labourer on building sites,
> > being the oddball sitting reading Modern Painters magazine (don?t judge
> me,
> > they were different times!)
> >
> > We?re all the creative oddballs here, until the accountants take over the
> > list. More womxn, more young people, more tenured academics (someone has
> to
> > love ?em!), more wild ideas that take years for some of us to grasp. A
> few
> > more splashes of disagreement over the ethical, environmental impacts of
> > work, more nervous ?is this art or not, please!? posts from the seats at
> > the back. More space for individuals to realise who they really are or
> want
> > to be.
> >
> > More. More. More.
> >
> > But I?m definitely not up for being a moderator. They?re the worst! :-)
> >
> > Love
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 23:20, <pl at voyd.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, alan, as you are one of the backbones of the community.
> >> Hope that it is short.
> >> You know I have something similar near me.
> >>
> >> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 23:16:18 +0100, Simon Mclennan via NetBehaviour <
> >> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Alan very sorry to hear this.
> >> Keep on! I?m sure you will.
> >> All the best,
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> Sent from my spyphone
> >>
> >> On 8 Jun 2021, at 19:55, Ana Vald?s via NetBehaviour <
> >> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Alan I hope your silence should be a short one! And regarding your
> >> brother sad but mortality is our companion and we need to deal with it.
> >> Until I fell sick with serious COVID and stayed one and half month at
> the
> >> Hospital I fell I was inmortal too?
> >> I am a changed person now? all the best to you and your brother
> >> Ana
> >>
> >> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 15:45, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
> >> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Alan,
> >>>
> >>> So sorry to hear this.
> >>> Wishing the very best to you all.
> >>> We will miss you.
> >>>
> >>> Ruth
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 5:51 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour <
> >>> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi All,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm going silent on Netbehaviour. My brother has cancer and I'm having
> >>>> a hard time digesting that.
> >>>> These discussions are difficult for me. I can always be reached
> >>>> back-channel at sondheim at gmail.com . I'll be posting on Facebook as
> >>>> usual and on the smaller lists wryting-l and Cybermind that I
> moderate.
> >>>> Apologies for any disruptions.
> >>>> For any announcements, I'd appreciate having my address added to your
> >>>> mailing list.
> >>>> Of course I'll go along with whatever the list transforms into.
> >>>> I need to sleep.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best to everyone, Alan
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >>>> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >>>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Ruth Catlow
> >>> she/her
> >>> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised
> >>> Arts Lab
> >>> +44 (0) 77370 02879
> >>>
> >>> *I will only agree to speak at events that are racially and gender
> >>> balanced.
> >>>
> >>> **sending thanks
> >>> <
> https://www.ovoenergy.com/ovo-newsroom/press-releases/2019/november/think-before-you-thank-if-every-brit-sent-one-less-thank-you-email-a-day-we-would-save-16433-tonnes-of-carbon-a-year-the-same-as-81152-flights-to-madrid.html>
> in
> >>> advance
> >>>
> >>> *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
> exhibitions,
> >>> labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.
> >>> furtherfield.org <http://www.furtherfield.org/>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> >>> technologies research hub
> >>>
> >>> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies
> now.
> >>>
> >>> decal.is <http://www.decal.is>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee
> >>>
> >>> Registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> >>>
> >>> Registered business address: Carbon Accountancy, 80-83 Long Lane,
> >>> London, EC1A 9ET
> >>> <
> https://www.google.com/maps/search/80-83+Long+Lane,+London,+EC1A+9ET?entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >>> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> >> --
> >> https://anavaldes.wordpress.com/
> >> www.twitter.com/caravia158
> >> http://www.scoop.it/t/art-and-activism/
> >> http://www.scoop.it/t/food-history-and-trivia
> >> http://www.scoop.it/t/urbanism-3-0
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> cell Sweden +4670-3213370
> >> cell Uruguay +598-99470758
> >>
> >>
> >> "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with
> >> your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will
> always
> >> long to return.
> >> ? Leonardo da Vinci
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/7cd6fe2a/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 12:56:54 -0600
> From: BishopZ <xchicago at gmail.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAH7a_6jUkHKUPvz3iLYyGGfpu_xP+6nPjij0EhNCG3e7RcDneg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> rhea, wonderful, thank you. a few thoughts-
>
> I've been looking at Iota lately. While coinbase and others describe Iota
> as a
> blockchain, their documentation says they are not a blockchain, but rather
> a different form of distributed ledger. They claim they're not a blockchain
> because each block refers to multiple parent blocks. In a tangled
> blockchain
> like Iota, blocks can share the same height.
>
> I wonder about a theoretical blockchain where the number of parents
> approaches
> the total number of blocks. While technically impossible, as a thought
> experiment
> it seems like such a thing would collapse the temporality by bringing all
> blocks
> to a block height of 1 and 2. Each block simultaneously being the genesis
> block
> and the first child block.
>
> >From the perspective of any block on this impossibly tangled chain,
> it would be the most current description of the state of the chain,
> and every block, including itself, would be the combined origin of
> the entire chain.
>
> I know a block can't hash itself and no one can be their own grandpa,
> but it seemed like this thought experiment shared some characteristics
> with multiplicity and other things.
>
> --
>
> There's also something interesting about the space between the blocks.
> In the same way that motion is a perception our brains construct when
> multiple static images are shown in quick succession.
>
> Seems like the succession of transactions in bitcoin is a kind of
> montage of value exchange, and it makes me curious about what
> other mental models we're perceiving in the space between.
>
> with admiration, bz
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 7:34 PM rhea via NetBehaviour <
> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
>
> > Bitcoin secures itself by rewarding the people who run it with payments
> in
> > Bitcoin. To get the rewards for publishing new blocks of transactions to
> > the Internet every ten minutes (on average), Bitcoin miners compete to
> > solve simple but time-consuming cryptographic puzzles. When Bitcoin
> > launched, miners could use desktop computers. But as Bitcoin became more
> > valuable it became worthwhile to use more and more powerful hardware in
> > larger and larger amounts to continue competing for the block rewards.
> > Bitcoin was written to handle this. Its difficulty algorithm creates a
> new
> > target schema for the block reward puzzles This algorithm targets ten
> > minute block times, and it will make the block puzzles as easy or as
> > difficult as is required to do this.
> >
> > That singular objective, pursued without concern for externalities, means
> > that Bitcoin's difficulty algorithm is a paperclipper. Its
> ever-increasing
> > energy usage, which has caused such moral panic, *would* boil the oceans
> > if it thought that the difficulty had to go that high - but then what
> > wouldn't? This is the purpose that it embodies in unbounded
> cryptoeconomic
> > incentives. For Bitcoin, securing the metronomic
> > heartbeat/pulse/breath/throb of ten minute blocks of transactions is all
> > that matters. Bitcoin exists to secure the value of those transactions
> over
> > time. To nestle in that temporality is to subject oneself to blockchain
> > temporality as surely as Stelarc's "Ping Body" was subjected to internet
> > geometry.
> >
> > Block height is a clock. I've met people who have timed meatspace events
> > to it. Block height has a calendar of "halvenings", block reward changes,
> > that are treated as festivals, along with scheduled protocol forks and
> > activations. It's more complex than that, though. Cyclical and linear
> time
> > interplay in the blockchain as they do in capitalism, which is hardly
> > surprising given Bitcoin's anarcho-capitalist roots. The different
> temporal
> > scales and intensities folded into the blockchain in order to produce it
> > make it a Deleuzean egg. Which, through a deliberate misreading, makes
> it a
> > world. We can call it a *welt* if it helps, which it doesn't.
> >
> > The word "blockchain" does not appear in Satoshi Nakamoto's 2009 Bitcoin
> > Whitepaper. Instead the pseudonymous creator (or creators) of Bitcoin
> talk
> > about the creation of a *timestamp server* to ensure the succession of
> > events (transactions) within a system. Time, for Bitcoin, is pure
> > succession just as number is pure succession for XXXXXXXXX. It is in this
> > sense that time on the blockchain is non-relativistic (as per Nick Land).
> > Worse, that time occurs *in* time, breaking XXXXXX's argument that it
> > cannot. We can recover from this a little by pointing out that it does
> not
> > occur within itself, but in an outside temporality, and a reassuringly
> > relativistic one. Still, it occurs in time, and produces a time of pure
> > succession.
> >
> > Bitcoin is the technonomic instantiation of Deleueze?s fourth synthesis
> of
> > time. *It is an empty repetition determined by the future.* For Bitcoin
> > that future is the block height (not the date or the Unix timestamp) when
> > all 21 million Bitcoin will have been minted, and the reality of that
> > future determines its present - a hyperstition secured with an increasing
> > fraction of the Earth's computing resources  by the block difficulty
> > targeting algorithm.
> >
> > This is a purely intensive world, an undialectical history within itself.
> > Step back and the onchain world and its history are shown to be
> incomplete
> > - the private keys that create its transactions are not part of that
> world.
> > This veil of ignorance, similar to the sub-quantum realm's role in
> > contemporary physics, also applies to on-chain time. The Unix timestamps
> > placed in each Bitcoin block leak the offchain time that each block occur
> > at, but they could be a lie. They must increase over time, but compared
> to
> > the block height (the block number), they do so in irregular leaps. Block
> > heights are certain, timestamps less so.
> >
> > Like cybernetics, block formation is probabilistic, converging on
> > certainty over time as more and more blocks build on top of the chain.
> This
> > process is irreversible, not just due to probability but to the trapdoor
> > function-based proof-of-work system that secures the Bitcoin blockchain.
> > Although it can be walked via the chain of hash values between blocks.
> >
> > Blockchain temporality comes into being with the blockchain, and vice
> > versa, at the same moment. This is similar to the reciprocal emergence of
> > capitalism with capitalist time as described by Anna Greenspan in
> > "Capitalism's Transcendent Time Machine". This is important because
> > different temporal orders afford different social orders. We can notice
> > this, or we can continue to stan or sulk at atomic clocks.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
>
>
> --
> ((? ? ?))
>
> http://bishopZ.com
> _______________________________________________________________________
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/fd43f8b8/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 21:21:29 +0100
> From: marc garrett <marc.garrett2 at gmail.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] going silent
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAOocshc2r3N83sa6xou1AFp-dWyibcPgdPERmudsU9yhBMa5Kg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Ana,
>
> Always great to hear from you,
>
> And, especially glad you have recovered from Covid-19. It has been a tough
> time for many of us this last year. I lost my mother and her boyfriend
> recently, which has brought about some serious questions.
>
> For me, those questions involved making some big choices that evolved
> around issues concerning getting closer to my personal interests. I am now
> part-time with Furtherfield curating, researching and doing projects like
> the Furtherlist & podcasts, and make art and write about things I am really
> intrigued by, but is also part of the culture we all belong to. This
> balance seems to work better for me after co-running Furtherfiel for over
> 25 years.
>
> You may be interested in this - The Year of Covid-19, Death and Collages.
> https://marcgarrett.org/2021/04/12/the-year-of-covid-19-death-and-collages/
>
> I also really enjoyed your post about how you view the list can develop in
> the near future.
>
> Wishing you well.
>
> Marc
>
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 19:57, Ana Vald?s via NetBehaviour <
> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
>
> > Alan I hope your silence should be a short one! And regarding your
> brother
> > sad but mortality is our companion and we need to deal with it.
> > Until I fell sick with serious COVID and stayed one and half month at the
> > Hospital I fell I was inmortal too?
> > I am a changed person now? all the best to you and your brother
> > Ana
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 15:45, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Alan,
> >>
> >> So sorry to hear this.
> >> Wishing the very best to you all.
> >> We will miss you.
> >>
> >> Ruth
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 5:51 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour <
> >> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> I'm going silent on Netbehaviour. My brother has cancer and I'm having
> a
> >>> hard time digesting that.
> >>> These discussions are difficult for me. I can always be reached
> >>> back-channel at sondheim at gmail.com . I'll be posting on Facebook as
> >>> usual and on the smaller lists wryting-l and Cybermind that I moderate.
> >>> Apologies for any disruptions.
> >>> For any announcements, I'd appreciate having my address added to your
> >>> mailing list.
> >>> Of course I'll go along with whatever the list transforms into.
> >>> I need to sleep.
> >>>
> >>> Best to everyone, Alan
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >>> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ruth Catlow
> >> she/her
> >> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised
> Arts
> >> Lab
> >> +44 (0) 77370 02879
> >>
> >> *I will only agree to speak at events that are racially and gender
> >> balanced.
> >>
> >> **sending thanks
> >> <
> https://www.ovoenergy.com/ovo-newsroom/press-releases/2019/november/think-before-you-thank-if-every-brit-sent-one-less-thank-you-email-a-day-we-would-save-16433-tonnes-of-carbon-a-year-the-same-as-81152-flights-to-madrid.html>
> in
> >> advance
> >>
> >> *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
> exhibitions,
> >> labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.
> >> furtherfield.org <http://www.furtherfield.org/>
> >>
> >> *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> >> technologies research hub
> >>
> >> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.
> >>
> >> decal.is <http://www.decal.is>
> >>
> >> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee
> >>
> >> Registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> >>
> >> Registered business address: Carbon Accountancy, 80-83 Long Lane,
> >> London, EC1A 9ET
> >> <
> https://www.google.com/maps/search/80-83+Long+Lane,+London,+EC1A+9ET?entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> >> .
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> > --
> > https://anavaldes.wordpress.com/
> > www.twitter.com/caravia158
> > http://www.scoop.it/t/art-and-activism/
> > http://www.scoop.it/t/food-history-and-trivia
> > http://www.scoop.it/t/urbanism-3-0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > <http://www.scoop.it/t/postcolonial-mind/>
> >
> > cell Sweden +4670-3213370
> > cell Uruguay +598-99470758
> >
> >
> > "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with
> > your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will
> always
> > long to return.
> > ? Leonardo da Vinci
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
>
>
> --
> Wishing you well
>
> Marc
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dr Marc Garrett
>
> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts
> Lab
>
> Furtherfield disrupts & democratises art and technology through
> exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free
> thinking. http://www.furtherfield.org
>
> DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0 technologies
> research hub for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies &
> economies now. http://decal.is/
>
> Recent publications:
>
> State Machines: Reflections & Actions at the Edge of Digital Citizenship,
> Finance, & Art. Edited by Yiannis Colakides, Marc Garrett, Inte Gloerich.
> Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam 2019 http://bit.do/eQgg3
>
> Artists Re:thinking the Blockchain. Eds, Ruth Catlow, Marc Garrett, Nathan
> Jones, & Sam Skinner. Liverpool Press - http://bit.ly/2x8XlMK
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/86648b24/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 17:31:01 -0300
> From: Ana Vald?s <agora158 at gmail.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>,
> marc.garrett at furtherfield.org
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] going silent
> Message-ID:
>         <CAFbYiEK5Oe7rfQn70fWWQ28atRz_zKV8crJ9nJ_XoB8u=
> FTBbw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Marc Ruth and all others Netbehaviour -empyre and Furtherfield are my
> digital ?homes? and I always feel welcome and encouraged in those places.
> Life after COVID is changing our way of life and giving us new perspectives
> or retaking old ones.
> Sadly to hear about your mother. I still don?t know why I survived maybe it
> was just serendipity or I have still some mission to accomplish
> Your virtual friend
> Ana
>
> On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 at 17:25, marc garrett via NetBehaviour <
> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ana,
> >
> > Always great to hear from you,
> >
> > And, especially glad you have recovered from Covid-19. It has been a
> tough
> > time for many of us this last year. I lost my mother and her boyfriend
> > recently, which has brought about some serious questions.
> >
> > For me, those questions involved making some big choices that evolved
> > around issues concerning getting closer to my personal interests. I am
> now
> > part-time with Furtherfield curating, researching and doing projects like
> > the Furtherlist & podcasts, and make art and write about things I am
> really
> > intrigued by, but is also part of the culture we all belong to. This
> > balance seems to work better for me after co-running Furtherfiel for over
> > 25 years.
> >
> > You may be interested in this - The Year of Covid-19, Death and Collages.
> >
> https://marcgarrett.org/2021/04/12/the-year-of-covid-19-death-and-collages/
> >
> > I also really enjoyed your post about how you view the list can develop
> in
> > the near future.
> >
> > Wishing you well.
> >
> > Marc
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 19:57, Ana Vald?s via NetBehaviour <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Alan I hope your silence should be a short one! And regarding your
> >> brother sad but mortality is our companion and we need to deal with it.
> >> Until I fell sick with serious COVID and stayed one and half month at
> the
> >> Hospital I fell I was inmortal too?
> >> I am a changed person now? all the best to you and your brother
> >> Ana
> >>
> >> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 15:45, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
> >> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Alan,
> >>>
> >>> So sorry to hear this.
> >>> Wishing the very best to you all.
> >>> We will miss you.
> >>>
> >>> Ruth
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 5:51 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour <
> >>> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi All,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm going silent on Netbehaviour. My brother has cancer and I'm having
> >>>> a hard time digesting that.
> >>>> These discussions are difficult for me. I can always be reached
> >>>> back-channel at sondheim at gmail.com . I'll be posting on Facebook as
> >>>> usual and on the smaller lists wryting-l and Cybermind that I
> moderate.
> >>>> Apologies for any disruptions.
> >>>> For any announcements, I'd appreciate having my address added to your
> >>>> mailing list.
> >>>> Of course I'll go along with whatever the list transforms into.
> >>>> I need to sleep.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best to everyone, Alan
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >>>> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >>>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Ruth Catlow
> >>> she/her
> >>> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised
> >>> Arts Lab
> >>> +44 (0) 77370 02879
> >>>
> >>> *I will only agree to speak at events that are racially and gender
> >>> balanced.
> >>>
> >>> **sending thanks
> >>> <
> https://www.ovoenergy.com/ovo-newsroom/press-releases/2019/november/think-before-you-thank-if-every-brit-sent-one-less-thank-you-email-a-day-we-would-save-16433-tonnes-of-carbon-a-year-the-same-as-81152-flights-to-madrid.html>
> in
> >>> advance
> >>>
> >>> *Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
> exhibitions,
> >>> labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.
> >>> furtherfield.org <http://www.furtherfield.org/>
> >>>
> >>> *DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> >>> technologies research hub
> >>>
> >>> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies
> now.
> >>>
> >>> decal.is <http://www.decal.is>
> >>>
> >>> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee
> >>>
> >>> Registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.
> >>>
> >>> Registered business address: Carbon Accountancy, 80-83 Long Lane,
> >>> London, EC1A 9ET
> >>> <
> https://www.google.com/maps/search/80-83+Long+Lane,+London,+EC1A+9ET?entry=gmail&source=g
> >
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >>> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >>> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>>
> >> --
> >> https://anavaldes.wordpress.com/
> >> www.twitter.com/caravia158
> >> http://www.scoop.it/t/art-and-activism/
> >> http://www.scoop.it/t/food-history-and-trivia
> >> http://www.scoop.it/t/urbanism-3-0
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> <http://www.scoop.it/t/postcolonial-mind/>
> >>
> >> cell Sweden +4670-3213370
> >> cell Uruguay +598-99470758
> >>
> >>
> >> "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with
> >> your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will
> always
> >> long to return.
> >> ? Leonardo da Vinci
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Wishing you well
> >
> > Marc
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Dr Marc Garrett
> >
> > Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts
> > Lab
> >
> > Furtherfield disrupts & democratises art and technology through
> > exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free
> > thinking. http://www.furtherfield.org
> >
> > DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0
> technologies
> > research hub for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies &
> > economies now. http://decal.is/
> >
> > Recent publications:
> >
> > State Machines: Reflections & Actions at the Edge of Digital Citizenship,
> > Finance, & Art. Edited by Yiannis Colakides, Marc Garrett, Inte Gloerich.
> > Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam 2019 http://bit.do/eQgg3
> >
> > Artists Re:thinking the Blockchain. Eds, Ruth Catlow, Marc Garrett,
> Nathan
> > Jones, & Sam Skinner. Liverpool Press - http://bit.ly/2x8XlMK
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> --
> https://anavaldes.wordpress.com/
> www.twitter.com/caravia158
> http://www.scoop.it/t/art-and-activism/
> http://www.scoop.it/t/food-history-and-trivia
> http://www.scoop.it/t/urbanism-3-0
>
>
>
>
> <http://www.scoop.it/t/postcolonial-mind/>
>
> cell Sweden +4670-3213370
> cell Uruguay +598-99470758
>
>
> "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with
> your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will always
> long to return.
> ? Leonardo da Vinci
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/690fea93/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 16:55:41 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim at panix.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: [NetBehaviour] tomorrow's post, Sarangi, other
> Message-ID: <alpine.NEB.2.23.451.2106091650080.24431 at panix3.panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>
>
> (Thank you everyone for these discussions! I learn so much from NB.
> Two things - I've been looking at the old Dodge/Kitchin Atlas of
> Cyberspace - you can find it online 2nd-hand - and it's amazing, a
> lot to be explored and (still) drawn from. Second, last night I did
> the piece below, which made me happy; the sarangi is a difficult
> instrument, and I'm making (I think) interesting music on it. It's
> played with a bow and the left hand doesn't press the strings onto
> the fingerboard, but presses against them from the side with the
> nails. A good player can get 3-4 octaves on the high string alone.)
>
>
> Sarangi, other
>
> This morning my hands do work my mind is off, there are gnats
> and insects in a sphere, I can't type without additional in-
> fluxions for example 'spheration' and last night I did make
> sarangi music, or music with sarangi, not by any case means
> was it tradition nor do I aspire to that in this life time or
> time of life without preparation decades but I am happy with
> this for once. Now I use a pepper-and-salt bow. My sarangi
> bow is artificial hair, next to impossible for the bite. I
> wake this morning and listen and am happy with this. I am
> happy with this, a long way down the path I still walk and
> play the mood in.
>
> http://www.alansondheim.org/srng.jpg
> https://youtu.be/6o6YdVvnOKo VIDEO
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 17:48:34 -0400
> From: Gabriel Menotti <gabriel.menotti at gmail.com>
> To: undisclosed-recipients:;
> Subject: [NetBehaviour] Museum Without Walls - an inventory of virtual
>         museums
> Message-ID:
>         <CAG=
> 4eDTR+oKxXiJUqVA2GaceTcEe3b8ohDNWM7tzg0PzYmAYHQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hey folks!
>
> Apologies for cross-posting! I hope that this project might interest some
> of you.
>
> Best!
> Menotti
>
> * * *
>
> *Museum Without Walls*
> > museusemparedes.com/en
> > @museusemparedes
>
> Museum Without Walls is an inventory of virtual museums, mapping media and
> political technologies that enable cultural institutions to expand on their
> possibilities. The project takes inspiration from the recent reform of the
> Esp?rito Santo Art Museum - MAES, which made its exhibition space much more
> susceptible to the surroundings. Untethered from its physical building,
> MAES? presence unfolds across webVR environments, fictional audio guides,
> and augmented reality filters.
>
> Over the next months, Museum Without Walls will host a series of
> discussions, interviews, VR workshops, and other activities. Follow the
> project on social media to keep track of its public program.
>
> Participating institutions: The Ant Farm Antioch Art Building,
> Commonolithic, Digital Museum of Digital Art, Dja Guata Por?, Festival
> Origraffes, Instituto Ra?zes da Piedade, Introdu??o ao Terceiro Mundo, The
> Kremer Collection, Laborat?rio de Processamento de Imagem Digital (Museu
> Nacional), Mirella Schena e Clara Sampaio, Museu das Remo??es, Museu de
> Arte do Esp?rito Santo, Para a Terra Volta toda Corpa em Mat?ria,
> Plataforma de Curadoria (UFES), Renato Pera, Riverine Archive, Virtual
> Hall.
>
> Museum Without Walls is coordinated by Gabriel Menotti, funded by the
> Esp?rito Santo State Cultural Offices (Secult-ES), and counts with the
> support of the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and
> Agnes Etherington Art Centre, Canada.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/e6d3eb9c/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 00:45:58 +0000
> From: Rhea Myers <rhea at hey.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> Message-ID: <f2c6fe646de6f642acb0d482d05af4b8cf445da1 at hey.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Block time tends to be constant, or at least it tends to target a
> constant rate. This prevents miners from mining one block per
> transaction and taking the block reward, and makes reasoning about
> different aspects of block production.
>
> Block rate targets vary from 10 minutes down to one second(!).
>
> People would like Bitcoin to handle many more transactions than it
> currently does, and it is here that the block size wars come in. But
> changing its ten minute target doesn?t seem to be a thing. ?
>
> On June 8, 2021, NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> > Great work. Struck by the absence of ?blockchain? from the original
> > white paper and the wide possibility of reimagining the ?timestamp
> > server.? The blockchain has always had a gears-in-clocks aspect of it
> > for me. I explained it to some Swiss folks this way once. In San
> > Francisco I explained that the blockchain are the panels in an
> > infinitely written comic strip: ?this happened, then this happened,
> > then this happened.??
> > But now I have a question: I?d always assumed block time was also
> > being pushed forward by demand, by transactions. No transactions, no
> > new blocks, no puzzles. With Bitcoin the story in my head is a clock
> > ticking at the speed of commerce. In the same way that if we all stood
> > still maybe the clocks would too. (With Ethereum the story gets more
> > complicated).?
> > Now I?ll think about the sky?s potential as a timestamp server: a
> > mechanic sundial designed to spin a small shadow-casting shape in time
> > with the system, the sun writing new blocks into a photogram cyanotype
> > until it?s fixed by rain.?
> > Thanks for this!
> > -e.
> >
> >
> > > On 8 Jun 2021, at 8:42 pm, Paul Hertz via NetBehaviour
> > > <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, thanks. Lot to mull over.?
> > > -- Paul
> >
>
>
> > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 9:56 PM Alan Sondheim <sondheim at panix.com
> > <mailto:sondheim at panix.com>> wrote:
>
> >  Find the reference to qm somewhat problematic but this is an
> > absolutely
> >  stunning account - at least for me - I've learned a lot from it.
> > Thank
> >  you!
> >
> >  Wow! - Alan - hope there's a full essay/book emerging -
> >
> >  On Tue, 8 Jun 2021, rhea via NetBehaviour wrote:
> >
> >  > Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 18:31:08 -0700
> >  > From: rhea via NetBehaviour <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > <mailto:netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>>
> >  > To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> >  >? ? ?<netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > <mailto:netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>>
> >  > Cc: rhea <rhea at hey.com <mailto:rhea at hey.com>>
> >  > Subject: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> >  >
> >  > Bitcoin secures itself by rewarding the people who run it with
> > payments in
> >  > Bitcoin. To get the rewards for publishing new blocks of
> > transactions to the
> >  > Internet every ten minutes (on average), Bitcoin miners compete to
> > solve
> >  > simple but time-consuming cryptographic puzzles. When Bitcoin
> > launched,
> >  > miners could use desktop computers. But as Bitcoin became more
> > valuable it
> >  > became worthwhile to use more and more powerful hardware in larger
> > and
> >  > larger amounts to continue competing for the block rewards. Bitcoin
> > was
> >  > written to handle this. Its difficulty algorithm creates a new
> > target schema
> >  > for the block reward puzzles This algorithm targets ten minute
> > block times,
> >  > and it will make the block puzzles as easy or as difficult as is
> > required to
> >  > do this.
> >  >
> >  > That singular objective, pursued without concern for externalities,
> > means
> >  > that Bitcoin's difficulty algorithm is a paperclipper. Its ever-
> > increasing
> >  > energy usage, which has caused such moral panic, would boil the
> > oceans if it
> >  > thought that the difficulty had to go that high - but then what
> > wouldn't?
> >  > This is the purpose that it embodies in unbounded cryptoeconomic
> > incentives.
> >  > For Bitcoin, securing the metronomic heartbeat/pulse/breath/throb
> > of ten
> >  > minute blocks of transactions is all that matters. Bitcoin exists
> > to secure
> >  > the value of those transactions over time. To nestle in that
> > temporality is
> >  > to subject oneself to blockchain temporality as surely as Stelarc's
> > "Ping
> >  > Body" was subjected to internet geometry.
> >  >
> >  > Block height is a clock. I've met people who have timed meatspace
> > events to
> >  > it. Block height has a calendar of "halvenings", block reward
> > changes, that
> >  > are treated as festivals, along with scheduled protocol forks and
> >  > activations. It's more complex than that, though. Cyclical and
> > linear time
> >  > interplay in the blockchain as they do in capitalism, which is
> > hardly
> >  > surprising given Bitcoin's anarcho-capitalist roots. The different
> > temporal
> >  > scales and intensities folded into the blockchain in order to
> > produce it
> >  > make it a Deleuzean egg. Which, through a deliberate misreading,
> > makes it a
> >  > world. We can call it a welt if it helps, which it doesn't.
> >  >
> >  > The word "blockchain" does not appear in Satoshi Nakamoto's 2009
> > Bitcoin
> >  > Whitepaper. Instead the pseudonymous creator (or creators) of
> > Bitcoin talk
> >  > about the creation of a timestamp server to ensure the succession
> > of events
> >  > (transactions) within a system. Time, for Bitcoin, is pure
> > succession just
> >  > as number is pure succession for XXXXXXXXX. It is in this sense
> > that time on
> >  > the blockchain is non-relativistic (as per Nick Land). Worse, that
> > time
> >  > occurs *in* time, breaking XXXXXX's argument that it cannot. We can
> > recover
> >  > from this a little by pointing out that it does not occur within
> > itself, but
> >  > in an outside temporality, and a reassuringly relativistic one.
> > Still, it
> >  > occurs in time, and produces a time of pure succession.
> >  >
> >  > Bitcoin is the technonomic instantiation of Deleueze?s fourth
> > synthesis of
> >  > time. It is an empty repetition determined by the future. For
> > Bitcoin that
> >  > future is the block height (not the date or the Unix timestamp)
> > when all 21
> >  > million Bitcoin will have been minted, and the reality of that
> > future
> >  > determines its present - a hyperstition secured with an increasing
> > fraction
> >  > of the Earth's computing resources? by the block difficulty
> > targeting
> >  > algorithm.
> >  >
> >  > This is a purely intensive world, an undialectical history within
> > itself.
> >  > Step back and the onchain world and its history are shown to be
> > incomplete -
> >  > the private keys that create its transactions are not part of that
> > world.
> >  > This veil of ignorance, similar to the sub-quantum realm's role in
> >  > contemporary physics, also applies to on-chain time. The Unix
> > timestamps
> >  > placed in each Bitcoin block leak the offchain time that each block
> > occur
> >  > at, but they could be a lie. They must increase over time, but
> > compared to
> >  > the block height (the block number), they do so in irregular leaps.
> > Block
> >  > heights are certain, timestamps less so.
> >  >
> >  > Like cybernetics, block formation is probabilistic, converging on
> > certainty
> >  > over time as more and more blocks build on top of the chain. This
> > process is
> >  > irreversible, not just due to probability but to the trapdoor
> > function-based
> >  > proof-of-work system that secures the Bitcoin blockchain. Although
> > it can be
> >  > walked via the chain of hash values between blocks.
> >  >
> >  > Blockchain temporality comes into being with the blockchain, and
> > vice versa,
> >  > at the same moment. This is similar to the reciprocal emergence of
> >  > capitalism with capitalist time as described by Anna Greenspan in
> >  > "Capitalism's Transcendent Time Machine". This is important because
> >  > different temporal orders afford different social orders. We can
> > notice
> >  > this, or we can continue to stan or sulk at atomic clocks.
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >_______________________________________________
> >  NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > <mailto:NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> > <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > ----- ? |(*,+,#,=)(#,=,*,+)(=,#,+,*)(+,*,=,#)| ? ---
> > <http://paulhertz.net/>_______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210610/4d2599a8/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 00:54:22 +0000
> From: Rhea Myers <rhea at hey.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> Message-ID: <b9937c43686f0d4f3520c58cce2cf8ff85966d10 at hey.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Yes it puts a spin on the ?blockchain solves the problem of spacetime?
> meme.
>
> >From software eating the world to blockchains eating spacetime?
>
> On June 8, 2021, Soenke Zehle <s.zehle at xmlab.org> wrote:
> > Thx very much for this. It seems (no tech expert speaking here) that
> > the shift from proof-of-work to proof-of-space-and-time is putting
> > another twist on the question of blockchain temporality?
> >
> > Btw, as (budding) fan of Blumenberg / theories of metaphor I continue
> > to be astonished by the poverty of language when it comes to tech.
> > Chia's recipe for success ("A farmer?s probability of winning a block
> > is the percentage of the total space that a farmer has compared to the
> > entire network", https://www.chia.net/faq/), for example, sounds just
> > like sth from the EU's infamous "general agricultural policy" world
> > (you scale you win) - and it came right with a global shortage of
> > storage systems
> > (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/26/new-
> > cryptocurrency-chia-blamed-for-hard-drive-shortages).
> >
> > Soenke
> >
> > Am Mi., 9. Juni 2021 um 07:11 Uhr schrieb Eryk Salvaggio via
> > NetBehaviour <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>:
> > >
> > > Great work. Struck by the absence of ?blockchain? from the original
> > white paper and the wide possibility of reimagining the ?timestamp
> > server.? The blockchain has always had a gears-in-clocks aspect of it
> > for me. I explained it to some Swiss folks this way once. In San
> > Francisco I explained that the blockchain are the panels in an
> > infinitely written comic strip: ?this happened, then this happened,
> > then this happened.?
> > >
> > > But now I have a question: I?d always assumed block time was also
> > being pushed forward by demand, by transactions. No transactions, no
> > new blocks, no puzzles. With Bitcoin the story in my head is a clock
> > ticking at the speed of commerce. In the same way that if we all stood
> > still maybe the clocks would too. (With Ethereum the story gets more
> > complicated).
> > >
> > > Now I?ll think about the sky?s potential as a timestamp server: a
> > mechanic sundial designed to spin a small shadow-casting shape in time
> > with the system, the sun writing new blocks into a photogram cyanotype
> > until it?s fixed by rain.
> > >
> > > Thanks for this!
> > >
> > > -e.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8 Jun 2021, at 8:42 pm, Paul Hertz via NetBehaviour
> > <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >?
> > > Yes, thanks. Lot to mull over.
> > >
> > > -- Paul
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 9:56 PM Alan Sondheim <sondheim at panix.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Find the reference to qm somewhat problematic but this is an
> > absolutely
> > >> stunning account - at least for me - I've learned a lot from it.
> > Thank
> > >> you!
> > >>
> > >> Wow! - Alan - hope there's a full essay/book emerging -
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 8 Jun 2021, rhea via NetBehaviour wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 18:31:08 -0700
> > >> > From: rhea via NetBehaviour <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> > >> > To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> > >> > <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> > >> > Cc: rhea <rhea at hey.com>
> > >> > Subject: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain
> > Temporalities
> > >> >
> > >> > Bitcoin secures itself by rewarding the people who run it with
> > payments in
> > >> > Bitcoin. To get the rewards for publishing new blocks of
> > transactions to the
> > >> > Internet every ten minutes (on average), Bitcoin miners compete
> > to solve
> > >> > simple but time-consuming cryptographic puzzles. When Bitcoin
> > launched,
> > >> > miners could use desktop computers. But as Bitcoin became more
> > valuable it
> > >> > became worthwhile to use more and more powerful hardware in
> > larger and
> > >> > larger amounts to continue competing for the block rewards.
> > Bitcoin was
> > >> > written to handle this. Its difficulty algorithm creates a new
> > target schema
> > >> > for the block reward puzzles This algorithm targets ten minute
> > block times,
> > >> > and it will make the block puzzles as easy or as difficult as is
> > required to
> > >> > do this.
> > >> >
> > >> > That singular objective, pursued without concern for
> > externalities, means
> > >> > that Bitcoin's difficulty algorithm is a paperclipper. Its ever-
> > increasing
> > >> > energy usage, which has caused such moral panic, would boil the
> > oceans if it
> > >> > thought that the difficulty had to go that high - but then what
> > wouldn't?
> > >> > This is the purpose that it embodies in unbounded cryptoeconomic
> > incentives.
> > >> > For Bitcoin, securing the metronomic heartbeat/pulse/breath/throb
> > of ten
> > >> > minute blocks of transactions is all that matters. Bitcoin exists
> > to secure
> > >> > the value of those transactions over time. To nestle in that
> > temporality is
> > >> > to subject oneself to blockchain temporality as surely as
> > Stelarc's "Ping
> > >> > Body" was subjected to internet geometry.
> > >> >
> > >> > Block height is a clock. I've met people who have timed meatspace
> > events to
> > >> > it. Block height has a calendar of "halvenings", block reward
> > changes, that
> > >> > are treated as festivals, along with scheduled protocol forks and
> > >> > activations. It's more complex than that, though. Cyclical and
> > linear time
> > >> > interplay in the blockchain as they do in capitalism, which is
> > hardly
> > >> > surprising given Bitcoin's anarcho-capitalist roots. The
> > different temporal
> > >> > scales and intensities folded into the blockchain in order to
> > produce it
> > >> > make it a Deleuzean egg. Which, through a deliberate misreading,
> > makes it a
> > >> > world. We can call it a welt if it helps, which it doesn't.
> > >> >
> > >> > The word "blockchain" does not appear in Satoshi Nakamoto's 2009
> > Bitcoin
> > >> > Whitepaper. Instead the pseudonymous creator (or creators) of
> > Bitcoin talk
> > >> > about the creation of a timestamp server to ensure the succession
> > of events
> > >> > (transactions) within a system. Time, for Bitcoin, is pure
> > succession just
> > >> > as number is pure succession for XXXXXXXXX. It is in this sense
> > that time on
> > >> > the blockchain is non-relativistic (as per Nick Land). Worse,
> > that time
> > >> > occurs *in* time, breaking XXXXXX's argument that it cannot. We
> > can recover
> > >> > from this a little by pointing out that it does not occur within
> > itself, but
> > >> > in an outside temporality, and a reassuringly relativistic one.
> > Still, it
> > >> > occurs in time, and produces a time of pure succession.
> > >> >
> > >> > Bitcoin is the technonomic instantiation of Deleueze?s fourth
> > synthesis of
> > >> > time. It is an empty repetition determined by the future. For
> > Bitcoin that
> > >> > future is the block height (not the date or the Unix timestamp)
> > when all 21
> > >> > million Bitcoin will have been minted, and the reality of that
> > future
> > >> > determines its present - a hyperstition secured with an
> > increasing fraction
> > >> > of the Earth's computing resources by the block difficulty
> > targeting
> > >> > algorithm.
> > >> >
> > >> > This is a purely intensive world, an undialectical history within
> > itself.
> > >> > Step back and the onchain world and its history are shown to be
> > incomplete -
> > >> > the private keys that create its transactions are not part of
> > that world.
> > >> > This veil of ignorance, similar to the sub-quantum realm's role
> > in
> > >> > contemporary physics, also applies to on-chain time. The Unix
> > timestamps
> > >> > placed in each Bitcoin block leak the offchain time that each
> > block occur
> > >> > at, but they could be a lie. They must increase over time, but
> > compared to
> > >> > the block height (the block number), they do so in irregular
> > leaps. Block
> > >> > heights are certain, timestamps less so.
> > >> >
> > >> > Like cybernetics, block formation is probabilistic, converging on
> > certainty
> > >> > over time as more and more blocks build on top of the chain. This
> > process is
> > >> > irreversible, not just due to probability but to the trapdoor
> > function-based
> > >> > proof-of-work system that secures the Bitcoin blockchain.
> > Although it can be
> > >> > walked via the chain of hash values between blocks.
> > >> >
> > >> > Blockchain temporality comes into being with the blockchain, and
> > vice versa,
> > >> > at the same moment. This is similar to the reciprocal emergence
> > of
> > >> > capitalism with capitalist time as described by Anna Greenspan in
> > >> > "Capitalism's Transcendent Time Machine". This is important
> > because
> > >> > different temporal orders afford different social orders. We can
> > notice
> > >> > this, or we can continue to stan or sulk at atomic clocks.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >_______________________________________________
> > >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> > >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ----- |(*,+,#,=)(#,=,*,+)(=,#,+,*)(+,*,=,#)| ---
> > > http://paulhertz.net/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210610/a03e91b5/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 01:02:56 +0000
> From: Rhea Myers <rhea at hey.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> Message-ID: <29ccc0ddb0df6e534c3779988d29c595139cc03f at hey.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I also liked the sound of Iota, but:
>
> https://www.coindesk.com/iota-being-shut-off-is-the-latest-chapter-in-
> an-absurdist-history
> <https://www.coindesk.com/iota-being-shut-off-is-the-latest-chapter-in-an-absurdist-history>
>
> https://twitter.com/SarahJamieLewis/status/1161353122343604225
>
> ?
>
> Each block in a chain does have every previous block as a (grand-)parent
> through the trail of hashes linking them. Making this an immediate
> relationship would be interestingly anti-patrilinear.
>
> ?
>
> The space between the blocks is invisible onchain. Offchain, the time
> between blocks is spent gathering transactions for the block after the
> one being currently mined. These are very different universes.
>
> Also:
>
> https://rhea.art/simple-blockchain-art-diagram
>
> ?
>
> On June 9, 2021, NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> > rhea, wonderful, thank you. a few thoughts-
> >
> > I've been looking at Iota lately. While coinbase and others describe
> > Iota as a?
> > blockchain, their documentation says they are not a blockchain, but
> > rather?
> > a different form of distributed ledger. They claim they're not a
> > blockchain?
> > because each block refers to multiple parent blocks. In a tangled
> > blockchain?
> > like Iota, blocks can share the same height.
> >
> > I wonder about a theoretical blockchain where the number of parents
> > approaches?
> > the total number of blocks. While technically impossible, as a thought
> > experiment?
> > it seems like such a thing would collapse the temporality by bringing
> > all blocks
> > to a block height of 1 and 2. Each block simultaneously being the
> > genesis block?
> > and the first child block.
> >
> > From the perspective of any block on this impossibly tangled chain,
> > it would be the most current description of the state of the chain,
> > and every block, including itself, would be the combined origin of
> > the entire chain.
> >
> > I know a block can't hash itself and no one can be their own grandpa,
> > but it seemed like this thought experiment shared some characteristics
> > with multiplicity and other things.
> >
> > --
> >
> > There's also something interesting about the space between the blocks.
> > In the same way that motion is a perception our brains construct when?
> > multiple static images are shown in quick succession.
> >
> > Seems like the succession of transactions in bitcoin is a kind of
> > montage of value exchange, and it makes me curious about what
> > other mental models we're perceiving in the space between.
> >
> > with admiration, bz
>
>
> > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 7:34 PM rhea via NetBehaviour
> > <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > <mailto:netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>> wrote:
>
> > Bitcoin secures itself by rewarding the people who run it with
> > payments in Bitcoin. To get the rewards for publishing new blocks of
> > transactions to the Internet every ten minutes (on average), Bitcoin
> > miners compete to solve simple but time-consuming cryptographic
> > puzzles. When Bitcoin launched, miners could use desktop computers.
> > But as Bitcoin became more valuable it became worthwhile to use more
> > and more powerful hardware in larger and larger amounts to continue
> > competing for the block rewards. Bitcoin was written to handle this.
> > Its difficulty algorithm creates a new target schema for the block
> > reward puzzles This algorithm targets ten minute block times, and it
> > will make the block puzzles as easy or as difficult as is required to
> > do this.
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > <mailto:NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> > <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour>
>
> > --?
>
>
> > ((? ? ?))
> > <http://bishopZ.com>
> > _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210610/8a0b6b26/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 01:04:50 +0000
> From: Rhea Myers <rhea at hey.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> Message-ID: <7bbd6655c0c6d6db4d26617e209ab37d576744d8 at hey.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Thank you!
>
> Yes I need to tune up the QM invocation, you are right. I?m trying to
> gesture towards limits on knowability within current physics rather than
> handwave with quantum woo. Any suggestions on how to improve that would
> be greatly appreciated. ?
>
> On June 9, 2021, Rhea Myers <rhea at hey.com> wrote:
> > I also liked the sound of Iota, but:
> >
> > https://www.coindesk.com/iota-being-shut-off-is-the-latest-chapter-in-
> > an-absurdist-history
> >
> > https://twitter.com/SarahJamieLewis/status/1161353122343604225
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Each block in a chain does have every previous block as a (grand-
> > )parent through the trail of hashes linking them. Making this an
> > immediate relationship would be interestingly anti-patrilinear.
> >
> > ?
> >
> > The space between the blocks is invisible onchain. Offchain, the time
> > between blocks is spent gathering transactions for the block after the
> > one being currently mined. These are very different universes.
> >
> > Also:
> >
> > https://rhea.art/simple-blockchain-art-diagram
> >
> > ?
> >
> > On June 9, 2021, NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
> > <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> > > rhea, wonderful, thank you. a few thoughts-
> > >
> > > I've been looking at Iota lately. While coinbase and others describe
> > > Iota as a?
> > > blockchain, their documentation says they are not a blockchain, but
> > > rather?
> > > a different form of distributed ledger. They claim they're not a
> > > blockchain?
> > > because each block refers to multiple parent blocks. In a tangled
> > > blockchain?
> > > like Iota, blocks can share the same height.
> > >
> > > I wonder about a theoretical blockchain where the number of parents
> > > approaches?
> > > the total number of blocks. While technically impossible, as a
> > > thought experiment?
> > > it seems like such a thing would collapse the temporality by
> > > bringing all blocks
> > > to a block height of 1 and 2. Each block simultaneously being the
> > > genesis block?
> > > and the first child block.
> > >
> > > From the perspective of any block on this impossibly tangled chain,
> > > it would be the most current description of the state of the chain,
> > > and every block, including itself, would be the combined origin of
> > > the entire chain.
> > >
> > > I know a block can't hash itself and no one can be their own
> > > grandpa,
> > > but it seemed like this thought experiment shared some
> > > characteristics
> > > with multiplicity and other things.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > There's also something interesting about the space between the
> > > blocks.
> > > In the same way that motion is a perception our brains construct
> > > when?
> > > multiple static images are shown in quick succession.
> > >
> > > Seems like the succession of transactions in bitcoin is a kind of
> > > montage of value exchange, and it makes me curious about what
> > > other mental models we're perceiving in the space between.
> > >
> > > with admiration, bz
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 7:34 PM rhea via NetBehaviour
> > > <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > > <mailto:netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>> wrote:
> >
> > > Bitcoin secures itself by rewarding the people who run it with
> > > payments in Bitcoin. To get the rewards for publishing new blocks of
> > > transactions to the Internet every ten minutes (on average), Bitcoin
> > > miners compete to solve simple but time-consuming cryptographic
> > > puzzles. When Bitcoin launched, miners could use desktop computers.
> > > But as Bitcoin became more valuable it became worthwhile to use more
> > > and more powerful hardware in larger and larger amounts to continue
> > > competing for the block rewards. Bitcoin was written to handle this.
> > > Its difficulty algorithm creates a new target schema for the block
> > > reward puzzles This algorithm targets ten minute block times, and it
> > > will make the block puzzles as easy or as difficult as is required
> > > to do this.
> > >  _______________________________________________
> > >  NetBehaviour mailing list
> > > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > > <mailto:NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> > > <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour>
> >
> > > --?
> >
> >
> > > ((? ? ?))
> > > <http://bishopZ.com>
> > > _______________________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210610/84ec3640/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 21:36:50 -0400
> From: Alan Sondheim <sondheim at gmail.com>
> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>         <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Work in Progress: Blockchain Temporalities
> Message-ID:
>         <CAO=pi2AJ-hRves-aNJ2O+akc=4NdVOmi96yTehBZpPo=-
> 0WvwA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Rhea,
>
> What I'd suggest is that you find a quantum physicist to work with,
> seriously. I did some copy-editing and had some discussions with David
> Finkelstein years ago; he was an expert in quantum logic, and widely
> published in the field, and he talked about the deep untranslatability of
> the mathematical frameworks into other areas of scholarship. A "QM"
> invocation seems a bit problematic unless you specify what QM you're
> talking about, what framework, and so forth. I've read books on the
> philosophy of QM and it's really technical. Apologies if you already know
> the math etc. I've just seen too many things of the sort Sokol wrote about.
>
> Best, Alan
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 9:07 PM Rhea Myers via NetBehaviour <
> netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
>
> > Thank you!
> >
> > Yes I need to tune up the QM invocation, you are right. I?m trying to
> > gesture towards limits on knowability within current physics rather than
> > handwave with quantum woo. Any suggestions on how to improve that would
> be
> > greatly appreciated. ?
> >
> > On June 9, 2021, Rhea Myers <rhea at hey.com> wrote:
> >
> > I also liked the sound of Iota, but:
> >
> >
> >
> https://www.coindesk.com/iota-being-shut-off-is-the-latest-chapter-in-an-absurdist-history
> >
> > https://twitter.com/SarahJamieLewis/status/1161353122343604225
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Each block in a chain does have every previous block as a (grand-)parent
> > through the trail of hashes linking them. Making this an immediate
> > relationship would be interestingly anti-patrilinear.
> >
> > ?
> >
> > The space between the blocks is invisible onchain. Offchain, the time
> > between blocks is spent gathering transactions for the block after the
> one
> > being currently mined. These are very different universes.
> >
> > Also:
> >
> > https://rhea.art/simple-blockchain-art-diagram
> >
> > ?
> >
> > On June 9, 2021, NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > rhea, wonderful, thank you. a few thoughts-
> >
> > I've been looking at Iota lately. While coinbase and others describe Iota
> > as a
> > blockchain, their documentation says they are not a blockchain, but
> rather
> > a different form of distributed ledger. They claim they're not a
> > blockchain
> > because each block refers to multiple parent blocks. In a tangled
> > blockchain
> > like Iota, blocks can share the same height.
> >
> > I wonder about a theoretical blockchain where the number of parents
> > approaches
> > the total number of blocks. While technically impossible, as a thought
> > experiment
> > it seems like such a thing would collapse the temporality by bringing all
> > blocks
> > to a block height of 1 and 2. Each block simultaneously being the genesis
> > block
> > and the first child block.
> >
> > From the perspective of any block on this impossibly tangled chain,
> > it would be the most current description of the state of the chain,
> > and every block, including itself, would be the combined origin of
> > the entire chain.
> >
> > I know a block can't hash itself and no one can be their own grandpa,
> > but it seemed like this thought experiment shared some characteristics
> > with multiplicity and other things.
> >
> > --
> >
> > There's also something interesting about the space between the blocks.
> > In the same way that motion is a perception our brains construct when
> > multiple static images are shown in quick succession.
> >
> > Seems like the succession of transactions in bitcoin is a kind of
> > montage of value exchange, and it makes me curious about what
> > other mental models we're perceiving in the space between.
> >
> > with admiration, bz
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 7:34 PM rhea via NetBehaviour <
> > netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
> >
> > Bitcoin secures itself by rewarding the people who run it with payments
> in
> >> Bitcoin. To get the rewards for publishing new blocks of transactions to
> >> the Internet every ten minutes (on average), Bitcoin miners compete to
> >> solve simple but time-consuming cryptographic puzzles. When Bitcoin
> >> launched, miners could use desktop computers. But as Bitcoin became more
> >> valuable it became worthwhile to use more and more powerful hardware in
> >> larger and larger amounts to continue competing for the block rewards.
> >> Bitcoin was written to handle this. Its difficulty algorithm creates a
> new
> >> target schema for the block reward puzzles This algorithm targets ten
> >> minute block times, and it will make the block puzzles as easy or as
> >> difficult as is required to do this.
> >>
> >> That singular objective, pursued without concern for externalities,
> means
> >> that Bitcoin's difficulty algorithm is a paperclipper. Its
> ever-increasing
> >> energy usage, which has caused such moral panic, *would* boil the oceans
> >> if it thought that the difficulty had to go that high - but then what
> >> wouldn't? This is the purpose that it embodies in unbounded
> cryptoeconomic
> >> incentives. For Bitcoin, securing the metronomic
> >> heartbeat/pulse/breath/throb of ten minute blocks of transactions is all
> >> that matters. Bitcoin exists to secure the value of those transactions
> over
> >> time. To nestle in that temporality is to subject oneself to blockchain
> >> temporality as surely as Stelarc's "Ping Body" was subjected to internet
> >> geometry.
> >>
> >> Block height is a clock. I've met people who have timed meatspace events
> >> to it. Block height has a calendar of "halvenings", block reward
> changes,
> >> that are treated as festivals, along with scheduled protocol forks and
> >> activations. It's more complex than that, though. Cyclical and linear
> time
> >> interplay in the blockchain as they do in capitalism, which is hardly
> >> surprising given Bitcoin's anarcho-capitalist roots. The different
> temporal
> >> scales and intensities folded into the blockchain in order to produce it
> >> make it a Deleuzean egg. Which, through a deliberate misreading, makes
> it a
> >> world. We can call it a *welt* if it helps, which it doesn't.
> >>
> >> The word "blockchain" does not appear in Satoshi Nakamoto's 2009 Bitcoin
> >> Whitepaper. Instead the pseudonymous creator (or creators) of Bitcoin
> talk
> >> about the creation of a *timestamp server* to ensure the succession of
> >> events (transactions) within a system. Time, for Bitcoin, is pure
> >> succession just as number is pure succession for XXXXXXXXX. It is in
> this
> >> sense that time on the blockchain is non-relativistic (as per Nick
> Land).
> >> Worse, that time occurs *in* time, breaking XXXXXX's argument that it
> >> cannot. We can recover from this a little by pointing out that it does
> not
> >> occur within itself, but in an outside temporality, and a reassuringly
> >> relativistic one. Still, it occurs in time, and produces a time of pure
> >> succession.
> >>
> >> Bitcoin is the technonomic instantiation of Deleueze?s fourth synthesis
> >> of time. *It is an empty repetition determined by the future.* For
> >> Bitcoin that future is the block height (not the date or the Unix
> >> timestamp) when all 21 million Bitcoin will have been minted, and the
> >> reality of that future determines its present - a hyperstition secured
> with
> >> an increasing fraction of the Earth's computing resources  by the block
> >> difficulty targeting algorithm.
> >>
> >> This is a purely intensive world, an undialectical history within
> itself.
> >> Step back and the onchain world and its history are shown to be
> incomplete
> >> - the private keys that create its transactions are not part of that
> world.
> >> This veil of ignorance, similar to the sub-quantum realm's role in
> >> contemporary physics, also applies to on-chain time. The Unix timestamps
> >> placed in each Bitcoin block leak the offchain time that each block
> occur
> >> at, but they could be a lie. They must increase over time, but compared
> to
> >> the block height (the block number), they do so in irregular leaps.
> Block
> >> heights are certain, timestamps less so.
> >>
> >> Like cybernetics, block formation is probabilistic, converging on
> >> certainty over time as more and more blocks build on top of the chain.
> This
> >> process is irreversible, not just due to probability but to the trapdoor
> >> function-based proof-of-work system that secures the Bitcoin blockchain.
> >> Although it can be walked via the chain of hash values between blocks.
> >>
> >> Blockchain temporality comes into being with the blockchain, and vice
> >> versa, at the same moment. This is similar to the reciprocal emergence
> of
> >> capitalism with capitalist time as described by Anna Greenspan in
> >> "Capitalism's Transcendent Time Machine". This is important because
> >> different temporal orders afford different social orders. We can notice
> >> this, or we can continue to stan or sulk at atomic clocks.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> NetBehaviour mailing list
> >> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> >> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >>
> > --
> >
> >
> > ((? ? ?))
> > http://bishopZ.com
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NetBehaviour mailing list
> > NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> > https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> >
>
>
> --
> *=====================================================*
>
> *directory http://www.alansondheim.org <http://www.alansondheim.org> tel
> 718-813-3285**email sondheim ut panix.com <http://panix.com>, sondheim ut
> gmail.com <http://gmail.com>*
> *=====================================================*
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210609/ff9e4ee1/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of NetBehaviour Digest, Vol 1280, Issue 1
> *********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210611/60ccfdf6/attachment.htm>


More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list