pipelines server

• Setup local server(s) & make your own network infrastructure, rather than “fixing the problems of internet access” by paying for increased bandwidth / data;
• Prefer “read/write” and negotiable networks to those that “just work”;
• Prefer pocket servers to those in the clouds;
• Embrace a diversity of network topologies and different scales (machine to machine, local nodes, institutional infrastructure) and consider the implications of working with each;
  
• Rather than a Web 2.0 model where resources must be uploaded onto “a 24/7 Internet” in order to share them; where sharing presupposes acceptance of non-negotiable / non-rewritable Terms of Service defined by market-leading global corporations)
• Invite participants to look critically at the implications of any infrastructural decisions, rather than imagining utopic and/or “killer” solutions;
• Aim to make that which is normally hidden and invisible (in contexts that tend to surveillance), explicit and shared (as a gesture of collective authorship), for instance:
  • Instead of caching web resources (silently), imagine services to archive resources and share them locally as cookbooks or a digital library;
  • Rather than logging servers and database accessible only by administrators, imagine (local) logs available for reading / editing by participants and published conditionally.

pipe server

communication system as part of operation Vula ( “Opening the path” in zulu ) that aimed to put an end to apartheid the ANC communication committee seems promising : the network which evolved over time, was using heterogeneous technology.¹ pipe server

• Setup local server(s) & make your own network infrastructure, rather than “fixing the problems of internet access” by paying for increased bandwidth / data;
• Prefer “read/write” and negotiable networks to those that “just work”;
• Prefer pocket servers to those in the clouds;
• Embrace a diversity of network topologies and different scales (machine to machine, local nodes, institutional infrastructure) and consider the implications of working with each;
  
• Rather than a Web 2.0 model where resources must be uploaded onto “a 24/7 Internet” in order to share them; where sharing presupposes acceptance of non-negotiable / non-rewritable Terms of Service defined by market-leading global corporations)
• Invite participants to look critically at the implications of any infrastructural decisions, rather than imagining utopic and/or “killer” solutions;
• Aim to make that which is normally hidden and invisible (in contexts that tend to surveillance), explicit and shared (as a gesture of collective authorship), for instance:
  • Instead of caching web resources (silently), imagine services to archive resources and share them locally as cookbooks or a digital library;
  • Rather than logging servers and database accessible only by administrators, imagine (local) logs available for reading / editing by participants and published conditionally.

promiscuity freq~piping

This morning I logged into the local server with the shared login and password. I wanted to execute a script that I was using yesterday and expected to find it in the terminal history. But then I realised that we because we are sharing the same account, our command histories are getting mixed up. promiscuity freq~piping

About the book: “Liking, sharing, friending, going viral: what would it mean to recognize these current modes of media interaction as promiscuous? In a contemporary network culture characterized by a proliferation of new forms of intimate mediated sociality, this book argues that promiscuity is a new standard of user engagement. Intimate relations among media users and between users and their media are increasingly structured by an entrepreneurial logic and put to work for the economic interests of media corporations. But these multiple intimacies can also be understood as technologies of promiscuous desire serving both to liberalize mediated social connection and to contain it within normative frames of value. Payne brings crucial questions of gender, sexuality, intimacy, and attention back into conversation with recent thinking on network culture”²

sexuality freq~piping

About the book: “Liking, sharing, friending, going viral: what would it mean to recognize these current modes of media interaction as promiscuous? In a contemporary network culture characterized by a proliferation of new forms of intimate mediated sociality, this book argues that promiscuity is a new standard of user engagement. Intimate relations among media users and between users and their media are increasingly structured by an entrepreneurial logic and put to work for the economic interests of media corporations. But these multiple intimacies can also be understood as technologies of promiscuous desire serving both to liberalize mediated social connection and to contain it within normative frames of value. Payne brings crucial questions of gender, sexuality, intimacy, and attention back into conversation with recent thinking on network culture”³

proliferation freq~piping

About the book: “Liking, sharing, friending, going viral: what would it mean to recognize these current modes of media interaction as promiscuous? In a contemporary network culture characterized by a proliferation of new forms of intimate mediated sociality, this book argues that promiscuity is a new standard of user engagement. Intimate relations among media users and between users and their media are increasingly structured by an entrepreneurial logic and put to work for the economic interests of media corporations. But these multiple intimacies can also be understood as technologies of promiscuous desire serving both to liberalize mediated social connection and to contain it within normative frames of value. Payne brings crucial questions of gender, sexuality, intimacy, and attention back into conversation with recent thinking on network culture”⁴

1. http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=4693
2. Robert Payne. The Promiscuity of Network Culture: Queer Theory and Digital Media. 2015.
3. Robert Payne. The Promiscuity of Network Culture: Queer Theory and Digital Media. 2015.
4. Robert Payne. The Promiscuity of Network Culture: Queer Theory and Digital Media. 2015.