fromCONCENTRATE

research blog of artist John O'Shea

PENUMBRA

For those who didn’t see it, my lecture/performance ‘PENUMBRA’ from last month is archived here:

PENUMBRA from John 0Shea on Vimeo.

Performance, sketch and demonstration of concept – interpreting and re-presenting law using the construct of traditional theatrical lighting.

Originally performed as part of ‘REVOLUTIONS IN FORM’ @ The Bluecoat Art Centre, Liverpool on Friday 18th June 2010.

lovingly documented by: Sam Meech

Thanks to Nathan Jones, Bluecoat poet in residence, for the invitation.

Google shafts Scroogle

I attempted to do a search using my favourite search website today – Scroogle Scraper – only to be redirected to the following post on Scroogles homepage:

We regret to announce that our Google scraper may have to be permanently retired, thanks to a change at Google. It depends on whether Google is willing to restore the simple interface that we’ve been scraping since Scroogle started five years ago. Actually, we’ve been using that interface for scraping since Google-Watch.org began in 2002.

This interface (here’s a sample from years ago) was remarkably stable all that time. During those eight years there were only about five changes that required some programming adjustments. Also, this interface was available at every Google data center in exactly the same form, which allowed us to use 700 IP addresses for Google.

That interface was at www.google.com/ie but on May 10, 2010 they took it down and inserted a redirect to /toolbar/ie8/sidebar.html. It used to have a search box, and the results it showed were generic during that entire time. It didn’t show the snippets unless you moused-over the links it produced (they were there for our program, so that was okay), and it has never had any ads. Our impression was that these results were from Google’s basic algorithms, and that extra features and ads were added on top of these generic results. Three years ago Google launched “Universal Search,” which meant that they added results from other Google services on their pages. But this simple interface we were using was not affected at all.

Now that interface is gone. It is not possible to continue Scroogle unless we have a simple interface that is stable. Google’s main consumer-oriented interface that they want everyone to use is too complex, and changes too frequently, to make our scraping operation possible.

Over the next few days we will attempt to contact Google and determine whether the old interface is gone as a matter of policy at Google, or if they simply have it hidden somewhere and will tell us where it is so that we can continue to use it.

Thank you for your support during these past five years. Check back in a week or so; if we don’t hear from Google by next week, I think we can all assume that Google would rather have no Scroogle, and no privacy for searchers, at all.

— Daniel Brandt, Public Information Research, scroogle AT lavabit.com

http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbw.cgi

- accessed 10:10am, Tuesday May 11th 2010

If, as suggested above, this really is the end of Scroogle, then this change marks a sad day.

What was important for me about the Scroogle Search, was that it offered an alternative (parasitic?) reading of Googles search algorithm, providing results free from paid advertising and also without granting Google an IP addressed search record as exchange currency.

I have to admit that I won’t miss the hokey cartoons and seemingly abject anti-Google paranoia which prevailed on Scroogle, but my internet experience will be poorer without their regular and healthy dose of skepticism toward Googles globally dominant infrastructure.

The example set by the Scroogle Scraper offered the potential for alternative and critical readings to flourish online, taking datasets and information provided by major institutions as ’source material’ rather than ‘finished product’.  Without the option for ‘interfacing’ with the information, that potential is diminished: it wasn’t ‘the vandals took the handles‘ after all.

(Please add comments below.)

Constant Agitation?

My first assignment of the DOING module (Simple Twisting Interface) introduced me to questions regarding the potential ‘resolution’ of information within a simple and intuitive twisting gesture – in that case turning a potentiometer and triggering audio samples within a MAXmsp patch.

For my second assignment of the DOING module (presentated 17/3/2010) I had an idea, which would work in a conceptually opposite direction:

I have begun to outline concerns regarding tokenistic ‘one click’ digital engagement with legal and political frameworks thru handheld devices and the web (see previous posts.)  Further to this, I am also alert and suspicious of the current ‘mania’ regarding the use of gesture, touch and interaction with digital technology and especially in relation to the new breed of ’smart phones,’ and home physical computing (iPhone, Nintendo Wii etc.)

And, since the title of the project brief was ‘Mirrors,’ I decided to work on something which could bring to the fore this fascination with our own (seemingly) reflected action.

I had an idea to develop some kind of application which could reflect and make apparent the (pathetic) nature of a users contribution.  This application would require a constant interaction in order to provide a very limited and basic feedback.

My idea was to use Processing to create a sketch for a potential iPhone application which would do NOTHING UNLESS SHAKEN.  On shaking the device, a looped video file will play but then, if the user stops shaking, the video will pause.  Since the video is set to loop after only a few seconds this constant user effort will return a very limited response.

In terms of the media file, I wanted something silly and banal and I decided to use a video of someone playing the maracas.  A suitable media file, which I found in the incredible Prelinger Archives and sampled in order to produce the loop, can be viewed here:  http://www.archive.org/details/Havana-Madri_2

Below is my sketch – which is extremely simple – embedding the video and overlaying an image of an iPhone.  Mouse movement over the sketch is used for the purpose of the sketch as an analogous ‘demo’ signal in place of actual, physical iPhone ’shaking.’

//SKETCH ‘Constant Agitation’ – John O’Shea
//DM MRes. / Culture Lab / 17-3-2010

import processing.video.*;

Movie video;
PImage img;

void setup(){
size(400, 400);
frameRate(10);
img = loadImage(“iPhone_template_400_400_240_160.png”);

video = new Movie(this, “MaracusLOOP169QVGAzoomed.mov”);
video.loop();
}

// callback function (below) seemed to result in undesired flickering
//so used ‘if’ function within ‘draw’

//void movieEvent(Movie m) {
// m.read();
//image(video,140,40);

void draw(){

//call video
if (video.available()){
video.read();
}

//video image positioned at desired location
image(video,40,40);

//boolean statement below checks for mouse movement
if (pmouseX == mouseX && pmouseY == mouseY){
video.speed(0);
}else{
video.speed(1);
}

//overlay image inserted at the very end so that it is on top
image(img, 0,0);
}

The complete file (with required media components) can also be downloaded here.

Physical Petition

The (symbolic) importance of physically petitioning 10 Downing Street should not be underestimated.

If a citizen takes their petition to 10 Downing Street they are literally and symbolically banging on the ‘front door’ of government and demanding that their issue be given due care and consideration by the highest elected authority in the land.

Our friends, MySociety, facilitate their own online brand of this complaint process; the No 10 Petitions Website – How does this online experience compare?

If you have encountered No 10 Petitions Website it might well have been through receiving an invitation to sign a petition via email (something like) -

Protest the Pope, 10 Downing Street Petition

Petition the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown

Please sign:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ProtestthePope/

And, the Number 10 Petitions Website fosters this kind of signature-gathering-via-email approach, which appears to be a very efficient way to:

  • gauge support for current issues
  • raise the public profile of an issue
  • bring an issue to the attention of central government

When I visited to the site today I noticed that there was a new petition there, campaigning for legislation regarding ‘Mosquito youth deterrent devices.’

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/MosquitoUse/

The petition was created by Howard Stapleton and reads:

‘We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Legislate
the use of the Mosquito device.’

I ’signed’ the petition, (since I strongly disagree with the use of these devices*) and it was pleasingly simple to do so.

Perhaps too simple?  Whilst the online petition is certainly an efficient delivery method, the process feels much more like making a mundane consumer complaint (rather than taking part in an engaged political action).  And that is not the only problem.

The No 10 Petitions Website operates, on one level, on a similar model to the previously mentioned FixMyStreet:

  • “report-the-problem-to-the-relevant-authority Model”

Can reporting a pothole in need of repair (or reporting a broken traffic light in the DIY Democracy example) to a council department REALLY be equated with reporting bigger, less well defined, more complex issues to the Prime Minister?

*These totally unregulated ‘mosquito devices’ send out a high frequency pulsing sound which can only be heard by younger people, indiscriminately targeting them; making their lives unpleasant. The legal use of these devices has not yet been tested in the British Court, but it is widely believed that they are a violation of International Human Rights Law.

Downing Street image file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Brazil license.
Original image here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lula_and_Brown_1_April_2009.jpg

Democracy? there’s an App for that!

I received a link via email today (thanks Tom):

DIY DEMOCRACY – these guys have developed an iPhone App for… well… engaging in Democracy…


The ‘DIY DEMOCRACY’ App allows citizens to report back to government agencies when they encounter an ‘issue’ and it also gives immediate access to the written law – it even has a button to ‘challenge the law!

The logic of the App seems to be that, given the correct information, our elected government bodies will ‘fix’ society’s problems e.g. broken traffic lights

Here is some more from the App’s website (it’s currently only available for use in the US):

“FIX YOUR STATE”
“FIX YOUR CITY”
“DOCUMENT YOUR EVIDENCE”
“TAKE ACTION”
“SHARE YOUR ISSUES”
“CONTACT YOUR LEADERS”

The above are all really good ideas BTW – but really… with an App? – I’m a little skeptical…

In recent years, in-keeping with the web 2.0 ‘participation,’ ‘interactivity’ trends there have emerged a great number of websites and applications which seem to offer to act as ‘broker’ between disenfranchised citizens and political process.

In the UK, quite a few sites operate under the banner of the charity ‘MySociety.’

An example project is ‘FixMyStreet,’ a website which deals very sensibly with a constant problem – potholes – by putting pro-active citizens in the position of informal ‘monitors.’

If you spot a pothole then you can simply enter the location (postcode) into the site (or a geotagged photo if you like) and all of the necessary information is AUTOMAJICALLY reported to the SPECIFIC RELEVANT LOCAL AUTHORITY so that they can schedule a repair.

In crowdsourcing pothole reporting, FixMyStreet has a very modest and clear remit and I think the website works primarily because it takes a lot of the hassle out of the ‘civic duty’ of COMPLAINING.

The DIY DEMOCRACY App takes this notion of reporting ‘problems’ to a totally different extreme:

THE POWER OF CHANGE IS IN YOUR HAND

Its rhetoric is very seductive, and raises some questions:

Are all of societies inequalities and failings mere logistical ‘bugs’?

And, can we REALLY solve all of our POLITICAL issues by remote control?

There are a growing number of transparent democracy websites and below is a link to a comprehensive blogpost by Tom Steinberg (of MySociety) outlining various emerging trends and strands:

Nine is the number: The different flavours of transparency website in 2009

HOPE : FEAR (or, what am I DOING here?)

(This is my FIRST blog post at Culture Lab, on my new research blog.)
(And, this is the ONLY blog post I’ll be writing in the FIRST-PERSON.) (I HOPE.)

Hope_or_Fear
(This is a very important question.)
(This is the question I need to be asking every day.)

In terms of my exploration of (digital) culture I WANT to start from HOPE.
Deep down, I am an OPTIMIST / ROMANTIC / IDEALIST.
I am excited by (the emergence of) incredible, technologically facilitated, opportunities for NEW social / cultural / democratic models presented by:
-    myriad, normalised, de-centralised, social network platforms
-    oft-cited ’second-life’ virtual environments
-    democratiZation ov knowledge: wikis, blogs, information-revolution FREECULTURE and tha open-source
-    digital RE-PRODUC-ABILITY, de-author(IZ)ed cultural production, unprecedented free sharing ov IDEAS

AND, specifically, I am interested in the manifestation of these new modes in the realm of ART making.

(BUT)

(I am also prone to FEAR.)
(Everyone is prone to FEAR)
(I’m a former luddite and my favourite film is ‘The Terminator’)
(Sometimes, I get out ov bed the wrong-side, and I start from FEAR.)

Plenty of reasons to FEAR:
-    new social spheres will replicate and accelerate old (visible and invisible) power-structure-hierarchies, cliques and violence – RESULT – increased GLOBAL SCALE social / cultural /political /economic ISOLATION, EXPLOITATION and ‘CYBER-BULLYING’
-    ALSO, inhuman horrors will be made easier by perceptual DETACHMENT from source through technological EXTENSION.
-    Challenge to existing 20th Century Copyright methods, PATENTS and INDUSTRY triggers an unprecedented backlash against SHARING (peer-to-peer prosecutions, chilling effect etc.)
-    access to technologies and cultural production remains SPECIALIZED whilst elites chat at conferences about ACCESSIBILITY…
-    open transparent culture = ZERO PRIVACY (Discuss.)  Potential for OSTRACISM, BLACKMAIL, MUD-THROWIN’ and CENSURE is immense and FACEBOOK is just the beginning.

(At the suggestion of my tutor – Jamie Allen – I simply wanted to put these out there.)
(In my next post I will discuss my own strategies for balancing HOPE against FEAR)
(comments / suggestions / responses welcome :-)

(And YES, I am aware of the ‘FEAR—>LOVE’ blackboard scene from Donnie Darko (below) – thanks!)

del.icio.us