Patrice Riemens on Thu, 18 Oct 2012 02:56:17 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> P2P Foundation: A Synthetic Overview of the

> - reprise
>> > >On 10/01/2012 02:55 AM, Felix Stalder wrote:
>> > >For me, the political test for all these things is whether they are
>> > >set as alternatives to commodity markets and private ownership, or
>> > >as alternatives to public infrastructures. In the first case, one
>> > >might get something interesting, in the second it's compassionate
>> > >neo-liberalism.
>> >
>> > On Mon, 01 Oct 2012, Brian Holmes wrote:
>> >
>> > I don't wanna nitpick, but the question is whether the share-tech
>> > rollout of the electronics corporations is USED as an alternative to
>> > the commodity markets and private ownership.
> [...]
>> > All I can say is we better use 'em. The current crisis is mopping up
>> > the remains of the postwar welfare-state institutions. To the exact
>> > extent that new forms of social cooperation do NOT emerge, there
>> > will be increasing social violence as predatory capitalism is taken
>> > to its logical conclusions on the ground.
>> >
>> > To the extent that they DO emerge, we have the chance to create
>> > something fabulous and new, the very figure of generosity,
>> > solidarity and beauty in the social realm. It's what Virno called
>> > "the non-state public sphere."
>> On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Jaromil wrote:
>> In my perception of what you are saying then such a project would hit
>> the spot: or Code for America
>> FWIW, same thing basically.
> [...]
>> Sanitizing: obviously the politburo is pushing for a reformist
>> rethoric and total abstraction of services in order to not disrupt the
>> city-jail architecture which as of today is totally established and
>> ticking like a clockwork.
> Now look at this project just gaining
> momentum in Italy, where various majors and city councils are adopting
> the app to let citizens interact about "urban decor"
> or this even more explicitly tied to the
> police apparatus in the Netherlands (which we remember well in Europe
> to be very, very efficient..) asking for people to collaborate
> reporting deviance within the urban tissue.
> this is the use made of the share-tech rollout in the social realm,
> implying collective ownership and responsibility for public space.
> Masses - or should I say crowds - self regulating against deviance,
> even the most hidden one, because now we have human eyes, not just
> CCDs.
> I think these are the grounds for widespread sociopathic behaviour.
> I'll be curious to read what is your experience with that.
> ciao

This morning on the radio, Dutch national ombudsman Mr Brenninkmeijer was
expressing concern about the interior minister's latest 'test balloon':
"why should police not be allowed to 'hack' into individual computers in
order to ferret out criminal evidence?". Mr Brenninkmeijer was mostly
concerned about the widespread attitude amongst the general public to
think that all this interferences were quite OK, since 'who has nothing to
hide has nothing to fear', something I tend to translate as "I'd very much
like the police to look into _your_ box" (but not mine).
As the crisis develops, sociopathic behaviour is indeed on the rise.

No cheers, p+4D!

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact: