Comments on: i never found the source of hell.jpg

By: tom moody

tom moody — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:14:10 +0000

Oh, wonderful, Google erased the page of Galloway’s book I linked to because it had been viewed too many times. Who needs to hack when our rulers do it for us?

]]>

By: cpb

cpb — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 21:49:18 +0000

thanks Tom ! i will look into this

]]>

By: tom moody

tom moody — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 02:52:35 +0000

Hi, cpb,
Alex Galloway’s book has no footnotes on this. Maybe there are some records pertaining to the ’98 Ars Electronica.
Here is the relevant text from Galloway’s book, from Google Books.
And a Wikipedia piece on Floodnet.
This link is to a “tactical warning” re: Floodnet based on “critiques from the Heart [sic?] Hackers.”
There is probably more out there. The conflict Galloway identifies is between right/libertarian “hackers” and lefty “tactical media” folks and their differing views on “responsible” views of the Internet (ca late ’90s). The politics now seem way toned down, in the Social Media era: now it’s deciding whether to join a “left” or a “right” Facebook group. No one is talking about destroying Facebook, although arguably society as a whole would benefit from this.
Best, Tom

]]>

By: cpb

cpb — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 21:42:46 +0000

no i haven’t. do you have a link ? it’s a difficult search on google… except if you’re talking about a perfume bottle :)

]]>

By: tom moody

tom moody — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:21:44 +0000

(Unless “disrupting the net” means posting long-loading files on autoplay.)

]]>

By: tom moody

tom moody — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:20:03 +0000

Did you know about HEART vs EDT controversy from your research or elsewhere? It seems relevant to the spamculture topic. For the most part it seems HEART won the battle – there has been a tacit agreement among online art types that disrupting the Net is bad form.

]]>

By: cpb

cpb — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:37:43 +0000

ah, oh, hmmm, i see.

]]>

By: tom moody

tom moody — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 05:04:49 +0000

cpb, I need to make my jokes clearer – I was saying that the maker of this chart

that i put in the next post needs a special circle of hell.

Alex Galloway talks about the history of net-respect vs net-disruption in his book Protocol. Paraphrasing from p. 214:

In 1998 at Ars Electronica the Electronic Disturbance Theatre (EDT) was criticized by HEART (Hackers for Electronic Arts). EDT’s “Floodnet” utility used DDoS attacks to stage political protests on the Net. HEART criticized this because it limits access to information by creating “disturbances” (EDT’s term) within protocol.
Nowadays the split is between a certain board that shall remain nameless launching attacks on political figures and ex-girlfriends vs the non-engaged “doves” of Nasty Nets and dump.fm.

]]>

By: cpb

cpb — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:40:22 +0000

Actually, outside of art related forums (where there’s a forum, there’s a flame, no matter what the topic is), there are quite a few spam art / troll art existing on the net (thinking about jodi, mez, and netchovka on nettime in the 90′s for instance). The history of the syndicate mailing-list is epic in that matter ; inke arns and that other guy maintaining the list accused netochvka and other spam artists of bringing down the list, after they shut it down for good coz they had enough of the mess and pranks and fake viruses. There is an e-mail out there where arns shout at the artists for being childish and irresponsable etc. In the end the whole thing might have been a hoax, maybe the history of the syndicate list was rewritten or something, i’m not sure, but it’s really fun to go back to the archives and read what and how it happened.

I haven’t been quite following up, but i know trolling around is something that still makes jodi happy (such kids :) i luv u jodi). I’m sure a lot of art people are out there “doing it”.

]]>

By: tom moody

tom moody — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 14:04:04 +0000

Ha ha, thanks, I know all these people!

Please add maker of “art and social media” chart in next post.

]]>