/int/ – No shittings during wörktime
„There is no place like home“

File (max. 4)
Return to
(optional)
  • Allowed file extensions (max. size 25 MB or specified)
    Images:  BMP, GIF, JPG, PNG, PSD   Videos:  FLV, MP4, WEBM  
    Archives:  7Z, RAR, ZIP   Audio:  FLAC, MP3, OGG, OPUS  
    Documents:  DJVU (50 MB), EPUB, MOBI, PDF (50 MB)  
  • Please read the Rules before posting.
  • Make sure you are familiar with the Guide to Anonymous Posting.

No. 53398
9 kB, 597 × 600
7 kB, 375 × 155
12 kB, 355 × 355
This thread is dedicated to discussions and findings about the present, future and history of (digital) media and technology. They can concern culture, society, politics and philosophy. I know we have a science thread and a computer thread, but this thread is decicated to the humanities side of the issue, though this thread should not exclude (computer) science.

I will make my updates here regulary I hope, so this is a personal thread which should accompany my personal studies, but you are invited to post here as well. I will mainly review articles or books, perhaps post personal experience we often discussed imageboards here, which can boil down board culture, but also social composition, so that would be a topic, but also hope to link thoughts together in the future.

More or less: What are the consequences of a digital age in various domains, where are we heading and where do we/it came from?

The thread could contain questions like:

[*]What is the digital, what does this notion imply?
[*]What is media?
[*]The dawning of the notion of networks
[*]Cybernetics and systems theory/science and other disciplinces that fostered the digital age
[*]The role and influence of mathematics.
[*]How did photography and radio waves affect cultures and philosophy?
[*] What's the history of phones and cell phones byeonf its technocial developement? This thread is not so much concerned with inventors but inventions and wider implications and consequences.
[*]How do media and technology affect human being? How does it affect the unsconscious, how does it shape the way we handle feelings and what does it to emotions, if we understand emotions as a cultural realm of expressions for feelings, for instance?
[*]What aesthetics are set up thanks to media and technology?
[*]How are media and technology organizing culture and society?
[*]How do media and technology shape the way we percieve the world?
[*] What implications does algorithmic automation have? How do algorithms shape culture and society, personal experience?
[*]What role do private enterprises play? How are states affected by the digital age?
[*]The impact of the digitality and computation on the environment.
[*]The hardware infrastructure and its social and political implications, also what do infrastructures and their asesthetics tell us?
[*]Design and design practices, be it software or other
[*]The role of art in the age of digitality, what are its possebilities, are thre new possebilities?

This thread is opened in a spirit of the Cyberntic Culture Research Unit. We don't have to deal with demons, numerology and escaping being human, but to let it flow theoretically, we've progressed a few decades since the internet came into being, the future of then is now, it's a different time, thus different handling. This is not about royal science (pure academia) but para academic exploration of a technological and media condition that occupes many pores of our life and the domains of the social, cultural, political and the personal.

Talking of the digital age is quite assuming, but I think we can all agree that it plays a significant part in our modes of existence.
>>
No. 53399
I will start with an article I just read. It starts in the presents and then goes into history to show that this phenomenon is nothing new. It's about the low paid and menial labor that often is behind machines, be they digital or not. But the focus is on human labor that is usually invisible to the shiny picture that gets painted for us by Big Tech. The author shows that this was the case in history as well, computation by distribution of labor with humans as calculators. Even then these people did not receive any credit but the glorious algorithms got all the praise for what they did, even though this kind of labor is behind its functioning smoothly in real life.

https://reallifemag.com/calculating-instruments/

It reminded me of a documentary where people on the Philippines sit hours infront of a computer judging pictures for plattform violations. The article reminded me of not getting stuck to much on narratives of smooth algorithms and automated control too much, as if these are magically self sustaining.
>>
No. 53400
> Computing has always been sourced from the knowledge of underpaid or unpaid

Isn't that true for everything?
There is no 1:1 relation between productivity and acquisition of capital.
Except for the times of the aristocrats I guess, when some noble assburger could dedicate his life to being a genius polymath because he didn't have to work.
>>
No. 53402
I have a new financial scheme now and it is related to NFTs although unthankfully I am yet again hopping on way too late because I didn't hear about NFTs while it was still underground. I think imageboards are becoming for cranky old people like BBS's and IRC became, at least in the places that are not AOL chatroom full of boomer tier mainstream like the 4kanker.

At this present moment I no longer actually believe that crypto is going to crash hard because all the major financial markets are now in on it. There is very real capital behind it now at the institutional level and it's being integrated institutionally. Paypal is only the beginning. Hence, I am trying to buy up shitcoins and altcoins hoping to nick some that get mainstreamed because I do not believe BTC will hold value forever as it's nothing more than a speculative gold standard since its protocols are absolute shit next to some others and ETH has its own problems with failed transactions.

I just read an article in TIME magazine the other dayyes I do actually read hard copy about NFTs, which means that the process of a few readers in international business times and The Economist is now becoming every single yuppie and boomer getting in on the action.

I really don't know at this point if prices will crash, let alone when. However what I can tell you is that the real key investment in the coming years is going to be whichever company fully capitalizes on Quantum computing, which itself is going to be a disruptive technology that breaks all our shit like blockchains and 256 bit encryption at the consumer level until those types of things are adapting to be using Qbit encryption.
>>
No. 53403
>>53400
In Capitalist societies, yes. In more free wheeling wild west economies an argument can be made for the inventor getting his fair share of credit, rather than the corporation and investor as now.

Really I am so repulsed by Capitalism at this point it is incredible and I fully intend to exploit its retarded structure just like Ayn Rand was willing to exploit the welfare state for her personal financial gain.

It all takes me back to that one possibly Finnish shitposter question iirc that was on EC which asked, paraphrasing,
>do videogames turn people into Socialists or spread Socialist ideology?
It was just some shitpost with what I thought was a retarded premise and some kind of retarded phrasing but it ReallyMadeMeThink™. This is due to the fact the vidya industry is entirely a Capitalist bourgeois moneymaking scheme at this point particularly on the Wect, largely ruled by the major corporations and investor caste, that overworks its producers and then sabotages their own work for a few extra shekels, only to push it through Steam which itself takes a massive cut of the profits and this was right before I was getting pissy with Steam.

I think it's a really ironic question in retrospect because vidya really did serve as the genesis for me turning from libertarianish to full on receptive to tankies, but not because of the vidya itself but the cancerousness of the industry.

Like for an example I go to play Project Aura the other day, and immediately I am confronted by more bullshit from the Capitalists. The setup is the planet was destroyed by global warming and you're an AI, I think?, in charge of waking up human colonists from cryogenic sleep so your corporation can rebuild humanity. It's seriously like this in every. Single. Fucking. Game. Imagine Earth is literally the exact same way. You head some corporation that's tasked with exploiting the natural resources of every alien world in your area of the galaxy while trying not to pollute the planet so much that the ice caps melt and the overall value of the planet is destroyed by fucking it up with your industry's climate change thus sinking a third of your buildings under the coasts. It's ridiculous. Like every single game I could possibly play posits the corporation as the ruler of the future.

I gradually came to realize it is this way partly because the companies themselves are just trying to "move more units" and have a vested stake in the system as much as some Soviet bureaucrat would. It really doesn't matter the game. I began taking umbrage with Stardock for releasing a pricey DLC after they showed they fucking suck at coding and didn't fix multiple problems with the base game, and then release political DLC for Galactic Civilizations III and hilariously provide "Objectivism" as an endpoint for your utopian galactic government but with Socialism nowhere in site. It shows the true bias and absurdity of all this all the more hilarious when you take an actual Objective viewpoint and realize China is likely to rule the earth for a span of time, unfortunately. They'll give you some utopian version of AnCapistan or feudalist monarchist system InSpace® but not even allow the presence of a commie society.

Thus I became a savagely contrarian tankie thanks to vidya. I cannot play even a single game without being immediately bombarded by their bougie propaganda. It made me feel like some perverse version of what I was told commie societies are, where I am bombarded daily by the propaganda. I go to play Prey and yet again, it is corporations. They even set it in alt history Cold War and simply decided to have the Soviets fall anyway because muh corpos. In fact the sole handful of games that even depict commies go from Singularity's alt history evil commie, to the absurdity of an FPS gaming fighting world conquering North Koreans as blatant propaganda, just as I refuse to play such casual bydlo filth that I late came to understand the extent of Call of Duty being literally DoD and establishment propaganda.

The point of all this is to say that in a twisted sense that shitposter was correct, but not for his assumed reasons, in that all vidya heavily pushes a certain Capitalist narrative--Capitalist, not woke retard which I've seldom experienced--and that it was specifically my rejection of the ubiquitous pro-corpo narrative.
>>
No. 53405
>>53400
Somehow, but here it is precisely about machines and why they don't really function without human labor, it is presented as fully automatic entity but really it's not. So this article is not so much about capital accumulation and exploitation of labor power but about a wrong image of automated systems or computers that excludes something fundamental to its functioning. We dream of automated systems but still masses of people do work that cannot be done otherwise or is just cheaper than it getting automated.

>>53402
What consequences will the digital currencies possibly have? For example in the organization/structure of X? X could be a domain of society.
>>
No. 53406 Kontra
>>53403
I would say that video games and media in general are pro-socialist.

You have to rememberer that they target the majority, not the upper class. It's why video games and movies are frequently focused on the enlisted man and glorify him often to the point where he is operating well above his rank.
However in some genres this just becomes impossible, grand strategy could never do that and it would be difficult for Medieval strategy games to attack the monarchy too harshly like most Hollywood media would as most likely you are going to be playing as a king.

It's the same with Space Travel particularly now. Who is it that is pushing space travel at the moment? Companies, so that is what the imagination of the people focus on, that is what the people think of when they think about future space exploration. Communism is dead so it colonising space makes no sense and is jarring to the player. You would have to add more back story to make that happen and it may still not come across as believable. Added to this corporations can be quite vague as to the nation of origin and don't necessary infer a government or nationality or backstory. If you have a corporation colonise space it can just be corp x and that is that, it doesn't need a backstory, it doesn't get political and it doesn't distract the player form the main focus of them game by redirecting his thoughts to earth. If the coloniser was the US it could imply that the US conquered earth or is the only nation capable of colonising space or at least the dominant nation in space and could anger many players and then it adds a backstory than needs to be explained and the relations between the nations have to be fleshed out etc, it's harder to do and can anger people.
>>
No. 53407 Kontra
>>53406
Most games aren't socialist as they celebrate an individual that is heroic and most often male and white, there is not much collective energy in that. It's pretty much a liberal western subject you are engaging with. It's more like you let people dream escaping a cage they are not able to fathom clearly, which is capitalism. And it fits perfectly with your working class trope, I mean computer games are capitalist ideology, that why they target the working class, not because they are socialist.
>>
No. 53410
>>53407
Race and gender is more to do with target audience than anything else and of course the protagonist will be heroic. They don't have to put black women as the protagonists for the game to have collective energy and in fact that could have the opposite effect.

But fighting against oppression and helping the oppressed, the upper class being evil and incompetent, the working class being heroic and capable, the want for a classless society and even business being evil are all frequent themes found in games.
>>
No. 53411 Kontra
>>53410
fighting opression is not necessarily socialist tbh, proto-capitalists fought opressive aristocracy and such.
I mean surely most games are built around the good vs. evil contrast, but if that is explicitly socialist in most cases or even more than 50% I think is doubtful. I could imagine many space exploration games are more about anarchy (individual freedom), than socialism. The former is not socialist per se.

>They don't have to put black women as the protagonists for the game to have collective energy and in fact that could have the opposite effect.

What do you mean by this?
>>
No. 53416
>>53410
Race and gender have absolutely fuckall to do with Socialism and Marxism, in fact focusing on that itself is detrimental to the point it's an extremely effective wedge at destroying any hope of unionization, let alone real class solidarity. I'd even go so far as to point out that Martin Luther King Jr. himself wasn't pestered all that much when he was jiving about the plight of the American negro, but the minute he said "the struggle of the white working man and the black working man is the same" they shot his ass.

> game to have collective energy a
You're speaking purely in abstractions and conjecture and insinuations now. No dude Duke Nukem is not "collective energy" whatever the hell that is supposed to mean, in fact most vidya glorifies the individual well over collective anything, while often going so far as having an elite dude mowing down literally thousands of mooks. Some media in particular like Batman is just straight up Capitalist propaganda that glorifies the victimized elite who "should" be able to beat the shit out of poor people with no checks on his power or "rights" whatsoever.

>But fighting against oppression and helping the oppressed,
At this point you're basically implying any kind of good vs evil story is Marxist
>the upper class being evil and incompetent,
That is absolutely not always the case. In point of fact you typically play an elite fighting force so far as most games go, from XCOM EU to Star Wars games to Satellite Reign and so on. Actually I think I'd like to really focus on Satellite Reign because you literally play an upstart company going after the major conglomerate, which in a sense is a true celebration of the spirit of Capitalism and muh entrepreneurs and such. There are so many games where you play a corporate asset it's ridiculous, and no, fighting the corpos doesn't fucking count as Socialist when you are a corpo or working for corpos yourself--then it's just industrial espionage and market competition.

>the working class being heroic and capable,
Not always. Not very often come to think of it. They're usually depicted as incompetent retards which is sadly just fiction reflecting the truth a lot of the time. I mean, like when you play a crpg you're usually not dealing with some muh Glorious People. A lot of fantasy shit is often directly about defending muh rightful king just as much as 40k is well 40k, which I think speaks volumes about the fact it itself is largely a borderline Socialist critique or parody of everything that gets taken at blatant face value. 40k amuses me because muh emprah is literally a fucking militant fedora who lines whole planets up against the wall for resisting his galactic The State, and who'd purge the fuck out of every retard in the eccelsiarchy. Somehow this fact is lost on poltiers who take it at face value.

I'd really like to interject for a moment and point out I often do not play games you likely sound to be playing, including basically not playing FPS games at all. I hate first person shooters. This is a lot more a reflection on my experience with city builders, as well as to lesser extent others like crpg, 4x, tactical, and so on. So ymmv. That being stated, I am at least aware of certain themes running through non-rpg first person games and usually they don't deviate from that as much. It becomes blatantly apparent to me when I compare Deus Ex 1 to contrast with what they did to the whole series later.

>the want for a classless society
Fucking where my dude
I don't think I can even remember one single game I played that truly advocated for this
>and even business being evil are all frequent themes found in games.
This is the only thing you said in this post where I'd half concede the point, because even then the message rarely is that "business is evil" but rather that the particular business you are fighting happens to be evil. In a certain sense you could be fighting against "aberrations" of market ideology, and I think to the point about "marketed towards a group of people" yeah, because it shows a canny self consciousness about all our daily experiences in the way Mandalore said of Concordance Extraction Company in Dead Space "if you ever worked in retail you'll get the point. CEC is not a good company to work for."

>>53406
I just got back from work and am tired so I'll give this post the respect of a point by point serious discussion I'm too tired and lazy to fully engage right now. Suffice it to say til then though, these are private companies, often with investors, and in some cases absolutely massive soul sucking corpos like Activision and EA so I have to ask, why the hell would they push a commie or Socialist message in anything?
>>
No. 53417
>>53416
>Race and gender have absolutely fuckall to do with Socialism and Marxism
Disagree. If our goal is a truly classless society, then any inequities between genders, ethnicities etc. must be addressed or else you simply end up carrying those same social hierarchies across. People like socialism to be 'clean', but the class struggle has more than one front. I've spoken of Reproductive Labour before as something that needs to be addressed but which is also very gendered, tying class and feminist struggles together. Ethnicity can come in with say in Australia where Indigenous people still suffer a lot of inequity, least of which is not even being recognised under the constitution. We're we to simply transpose the current liberal 'proletariat' onto a model of the dictatorship of the proletariat then we would end up with new classes, in a kind of bonapartist-deformed workers' state nightmare hybrid.

Relating to the topic, I think that digital communication, especially using text or other semi-human means (as in attributed and even sometimes with a photo, but not face to face engagement) is a massive good in allowing not only rapid communication and networking across vast distances but for also allowing people to communicate as equals. You can share experiences or opinions on subjects but not have to directly overcome visual impressions, or any social anxieties you may have.

It basically has the potential to destroy normativity in its sphere, and as the digital and real worlds increasingly mingle, may start to impact normativities outside of digital spaces.
>>
No. 53419 Kontra
>>53411
Capitalism shares some ideology with Socialism in that way. In theory, a capitalist society should actually be classless, genderless and raceless in many ways. It should be egalitarian and where you get in life should be based on what ability you have that you can monetise. That's the basis of the American dream. Of course in reality it does not happen like that.

What I mean by it is that in shoehorning a protagonist like that into a game you are dividing the community and it comes across as a gimmick and appeasement rather than anything else.

>>53416
Race and Gender are an aspect of it.

>At this point you're basically implying any kind of good vs evil story is Marxist

When portrayed how they like to portray it, yes it is.

>That is absolutely not always the case. In point of fact you typically play an elite fighting force so far as most games go, from XCOM EU to Star Wars games to Satellite Reign and so on. Actually I think I'd like to really focus on Satellite Reign because you literally play an upstart company going after the major conglomerate, which in a sense is a true celebration of the spirit of Capitalism and muh entrepreneurs and such. There are so many games where you play a corporate asset it's ridiculous, and no, fighting the corpos doesn't fucking count as Socialist when you are a corpo or working for corpos yourself--then it's just industrial espionage and market competition.

Nothing is always the case(as I already addressed), it's just a common theme. Even if you play an elite fighting force you are not an elite in the class sense, you often play as an enlisted man with other enlisted men and then there is often a clash with high command because the officers don't know anything, they don't know or care about the situation on the ground all they care about is their political standing etc.

>I'd really like to interject for a moment and point out I often do not play games you likely sound to be playing, including basically not playing FPS games at all. I hate first person shooters. This is a lot more a reflection on my experience with city builders,

That is also related to my point here >>53406 I don't play city builders but the fact that it is a city builder is of course going to limit the amount of socialist ideology that can be put in it. After all, it's the elites that are the ones building cities. It's why many genres are limited in what they can do in that regard, like fantasy that you also mention. Fantasy is set in the times when they had kings so attacking them all can be difficult, however it still can be done and often there will be an evil king who got there through, well the same way they all do, but then the player might be helping a pretender who is not from the royal family or maybe was an outcast but either way it's a bottom up movement overthrowing the evil king to replace him with a socialist one.

Classless society is advocated in many games, all of the points I mention themselves do that. They don't have to outright say that that is what they are aiming for but they are frequently attacking notions of class and frequently glorify ideas of egalitarianism.

Anyway, I'm not really sure how relevant this is to the thread so I won't really go on much more about it.

>I just got back from work and am tired so I'll give this post the respect of a point by point serious discussion I'm too tired and lazy to fully engage right now. Suffice it to say til then though, these are private companies, often with investors, and in some cases absolutely massive soul sucking corpos like Activision and EA so I have to ask, why the hell would they push a commie or Socialist message in anything?

To make money by aiming at the likely and largest target market. Adding socialist ideology doesn't actually threaten them in anyway, the people themselves are incompetent and lack the drive and ability to actually do anything like that. And people hate corporations anyway, it doesn't actually stop them buying from them or using their services at all. People still use social media even when they know this, people still buy games from EA even if they know it's a soul sucking corpo.
>>
No. 53426
>>53419
>In theory, a capitalist society should actually be classless
Class is not just how much money you have, or what political rights the state grants. It's about your position on the totem pole. The working class of a wealthy country have more in common with the working class of a poor country than they do the rich of a poor country. The wealth and rights of the people change, but their social role as the labour pool from which the riches of the capitalists are extracted remains the same.

And tbh capitalist society cannot function without classes because the fundamental relationship of capitalist business ownership is that of an employing class extracting vale from a working class. If everybody owned the means of production then you either have nothing being produced because everyone is a 'boss' or you have socialism where the means are owned by the proletariat and there is no employing class.
>>
No. 53427 Kontra
>>53426
True but a lack of social mobility is also an important part of what makes class. In a capitalist society, even though one is born from working class parents they should be able to get an education and move up to a higher position on that totem pole. In theory where you sit on that totem pole should be based on merit.

Socialism still has an employing class just of a different nature. Instead of making goods for a company and it's CEO you are making goods for the state and it's politicians. It's not business extracting value from the working class but the state.
>>
No. 53428
>>53427
First point: that's still class based. The fact that the class isn't hereditary doesn't change that it's a class.

Second point: socialism =\= Stalinism. What you're talking about is what's called a deformed workers state, that being a scenario in which the capitalists are gone, the economy is nationalised etc. while the workers remain disempowered. Socialism is trying to create the dictatorship of the proletariat, which is the exact opposite of a disempowered working class.
>>
No. 53429 Kontra
>>53428
All society is going to be class based in some way. Only by removing the hereditary aspect it also removes much of the social aspect as well and does not engrain ideas of class and the barriers that bring into society.

It doesn't matter, there is always going to be different people with different roles and different status in a society, there will always be class in that way and without it society will not function. There has to be a governing body and there has to be educated doctors and such they will always be a class onto themselves that are separate from the proletariat.
>>
No. 53444
34 kB, 395 × 600
I share the notes here I made to the forword of Friedrich Kittler Grammophon, Film, Typewriter. It's a famous monograph.
Basically Kittler says that media determines humans, the technical determines who we are. In the book the (tbh alluring) approach is to look what literary writes had to say about media like photography, film and so on, how they perceived the rise of these media, one example is the poet Rainer-Maria Rilke. Kittler says it's a shock to a cultured defined by script.

Machines and technology (today) bypass the script, elude their/the description by the script. What remains are narratives (retrospectives). The book will be exactly such a (retrospective) narration, it gathers texts and "passages", connects them to illuminate the moments in which the novelty of technical media was still processed in writing. For that, Kittler draws on older literature and writers' notes, which serve as sources in which an "aesthetics of horror" is to be found. a horror towards the new technical media.
Writers record between 1880 and 1920 how the new media enter the world and have an effect, to the "horror" of people who have hitherto relied on and been accustomed to writing (by implication, a culture is coming to an end).
According to Kittler, the book gathers (past) scenes of birth that provide information about our present and (thus) the future.

"Man" disappears (views of old epochs, humanism?), of "man" there is only what media store and transmit.
Kittler speaks of the fact that man as media inventor is a phantasm What is perhaps meant here is that it becomes recognizable that the technical media determine man and not vice versa, thus the situation (war language) becomes recognizable.
The war is not one of the people, but one of the technical means and media. The human being is forgotten in this situation. Here a media materialism a priori emerges.
>>
No. 53446
>>53444
Do most humans seriously think just in linear narratives with like a beginning and endpoint? Is that seriously how almost all of humanity constructs its logical centers?
>>
No. 53450
>>53446
What exactly do you adress in that post? The way history is told here? It does review sources in order to say something about a time and roll out a thesis about media simultaniously.
Many histories today acknowledge recursions, things of the past get dialed up again years later, like sociometry around 1900 or so, gets applied again these days.
>>
No. 53454
>>53450
No what I meant by that is exactly what I just said. Your post's implication was that humans think narratively, which I understand and had known for quite awhile, but it was something about the phraseology of your posting which dawned on me the actual depth of how much this may be something ingrained within human beings.

What I meant is what I said. Do much of humans really just think in narratives?
>>
No. 53457
136 kB, 1024 × 1001
23 kB, 341 × 499
>>53454
I did not imply that humans think in narration. Kittler is chosing narration as form. Since the book is historic it relies on narration because that is one crucial aspect of history, even as academic discipline, to tell a story.
There are thoughts on narration being an elemental thing in human existence though ofc. I think narration is a form to make sense. The myth is seen as an early form of narration as collective sense making. And perhaps a form gives shape to a shapeless choatic mass. You have to differentitate in order to understand/process etc. So regarding the start and end point, I think this is a necessary setup in order to finish a work, to have an entity you need to make clear it has boundaries, for instance a beginning and and ending. That many things still exist outside of the chosen boundaries is obvious, but might also be a necessary limit of human cognition perhaps.

Kittler is selecting things to tell his own story, which is btw ironic and paradox, but pretty much with intent: while he puts forward the thesis that the era of script is ending, he is one of his last participants, recording its ending by a glance into history, while preparing us for the future that shines through in this past he is presenting.
>>
No. 53524
148 kB, 1080 × 1193
Just for the giggles.

I thought I could post a 3D art but it seems like I did not download it. I would like to know what you think of 3D art, to me it is promising in a way, since alomost everything can be rendered, the potential is different than a blank canvas, yet some similarities occure.
>>
No. 53532
>>53531
I'm not interested in doing 3D art myself. Rather, the question would be, what makes it different to other art, does it "move" differently? Why and how then? What is possible with it, that wasn't before, and if so, why and how?

I don't know much of its history tbh, but recently I've encountered more of it when engaging with contemporary art. It often looks kinda 90s to me, yet that isn't necessarily a bad thing, not because of retro feelings but because I don't think that it needs super realistic 3D models to bring itself across.
>>
No. 53537
>The role of art in the age of digitality, what are its possibilities, are there new possibilities?

Video games were the most prominent of emerging forms of digital art. Interactive storytelling has become widely expanded thanks to them. Plus we have VR becoming more available.

>The impact of the digitality and computation on the environment.

Never really seen this question discussed until recently with NTFs and Bitcoin. But this should in actuality make us ask broader questions about how technology itself affects the environment. Too much electricity being used, might I ask.

>What aesthetics are set up thanks to media and technology?

My mind immediately jumps to stuff like vaporwave, weirdly enough. In the 90s, PCs were released in droves and many young kids grew up using them. The reason why vaporwave became a popular thing was due to nostalgia. As someone who used a Win. 95 or 98 when I was very young, the technological aspect mixed with 95 imagery was appealing to look at.

>Design and design practices, be it software or other

As the internet became a part of the establishment and smartphones/tablets expanded access to it, web design became neutered and simplistic in order to become marketable and appealing to your average mom or sister. There’s certainly a way to make minimalism appealing, but at the same time I look back on older websites and I appreciate the basic HTML compared to now.
>>
No. 53549
19 kB, 400 × 267
>>53537
>Video games were the most prominent of emerging forms of digital art. Interactive storytelling has become widely expanded thanks to them. Plus we have VR becoming more available.

Yeah I thought about interactivity and art, so the potential that is rolled out in computer games and VR could be stimulating for an art context might have already happened tbh, that perhaps not only focuses on entertainment, though I don't want to say all games are only entertainment, I think it was here that we discussed that there exists are vital niche in game design these days.

>Never really seen this question discussed until recently with NTFs and Bitcoin. But this should in actuality make us ask broader questions about how technology itself affects the environment. Too much electricity being used, might I ask.

The question of power consumption indeed is a main one. I read that the industry within the last decades already made possible less consumptive computers, without that development we might not have been able to get this far as we are know because the energy consumption would be too much. Cooling is a important for that and there have been expreiments with underwater server farms. Which brings us to the energy consumption of data centers.

>As someone who used a Win. 95 or 98 when I was very young, the technological aspect mixed with 95 imagery was appealing to look at.

I recently listened to windows sounds and some are engrained in my brain. Put a smile on my face. Digital glitches might be a new form of aesthetics as well.
I think for me its also the technicity itself that has something aesthetic about it. Can't articulate it more precises though.

>There’s certainly a way to make minimalism appealing,

Yeah it makes navigating easier, but at the same time hides away a lot of possibilities. Besides the user friendly aspect, there also is a user guiding as aim in design. Navgiation and resting/dwelling time on an app regulated by a certain design like the endless feed.
>>
No. 53565
>>53549
I think that the problem with NFTs is it's essentially trying to bottle the artist which everything art related tries to do but by making it so ephemeral into an absurdity that now we see exactly the role and function of art under Capitalism fully realized which is merely a financial instrument for the storage and transfer of capital, which NFTs can do quite well, as can buttcoin or any other crypto thus enabling the wealthy international elite to carry on with greater ease than ever before. This is because you cannot physically reproduce a painting, but you can just screenshot an "authentic" digital art piece. It's kinda the problem with digital art in general which is that people want to have and to hold that art, and to hang it up around their house. I cannot imagine anyone but the biggest twats among the wealthy hanging up a $2.5 million NFT as their desktop wallpaper.

I think it's actually quite nice for the average artist though, in that it can at least in theory democratize things to where they can take a scan of their drawing and put it up but I feel like we've been down this road before and somehow it'll just centralize things further to where the people that produce nothing get a far greater share and control over art in the end. I also think it's abhorrent that they're using Ethereum. Like what the fuck, it's such an unbelievably shitty crypto. People have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars on its gas fees. I personally lost $16 on a failed transaction with ETH. It's the stupidest fucking crypto out there and I think actually relying on it for NFTs could become their downfall. Otherwise, Dutch Tulips.

I think some people are buying lots of it just because the initial wave are the crypto millionaires and that it won't spread much beyond them. Like I said, people generally want art to have and to hold but the thing with computer games as art is it's at least an actually interactive experience which is precisely why so many people have looked the other way as all these companies stopped shipping out manuals and strategy guides and wallpapers, a fact which still annoys the fuck out of me to this very day. Like I mean I have never, ever bought any "digital art book" for 90 fucking dollars nor shall I ever. Either you ship me my wallpaper for my bedroom or fuck off. The same thing goes for mp3s and whatever else. If I can download it and you're not sending me hardcopy I'm not paying all that extra, which likewise is probably one reason people tolerated the all digital switch at all which was at least it used to be cheaper back then, but now it is even more expensive buying digital only software than it was buying battlechests with the manuals.

So, there is always that. You're always going to have people like me who get pissy about no physical aspect to something. Like when all this shit is over if I still have enough money left floating around I'm probably going to try and make a trip to the bookstore. Why? Because I refuse to use a Kindle, I refuse to give a shitty corporation ownership over my book, and because I demand something unalterable in my hand. An NFT may at least in theory bypass two of those things, but still.

Imho the only true thing which an NFT has got going for it is if somebody just focuses in creating really mindblowing gifs. This is partly because it'd be a lot more pain in the ass painstakingly making copies as opposed to screenshoting, and also because I do happen to think gif like things show a lot of artistic promise.

However that being stated it's going to be as few and far between as in vidya itself, which you will notice has largely just become a banal money making enterprise geared towards predictable mediocre returns rather than try something truly inspired and daring. This is all a real great shame because vidya has got the most mindblowing potential for not just art but also education and training since the invention of the printing press and written language before that, but like with everything it's usually squandered on complete garbage. We could be seeing and truly experiencing the hyperspace scene from Space Odyssey but instead we get Rick and Morty fart jokes and some shitty "VN" going all "kawasaki thinks you-a cutu 'w' senpai" or whatever trash speaking of which I'd really like to point out how profoundly irksome that title is to me because "visual novel" is exactly how I'd describe Planescape but I discovered it means shitty anime comic books in steam shovelware form.

So in summation, lotta promise, extremely limited execution in its potential regarding vidya, even worse potential in NFT because basically it's only great potential is if it can somehow make actual artists enough money that they can dedicate themselves to it as a living as opposed to wasting their lives making corporate advertisements, or the internet being flooded with shitpost gifs making way for more art.

I will say one final thing in favor of an NFT though, which is namely that shoppers are not in fact rational actors contrary to what any muh markets fag tries to tell you, and that includes people really paying for the feeling of something which that includes wanting to buy some thousands of dollars jpeg just because it's the one "authentic" one in the same sense as you'd want to buy an authentic Michelangelo and not give a shit about reproductions. I have actually caught that tendency in myself when shopping for vidya and which is exactly why I tend to dislike simply the feeling of pirating games because it makes it feel like suddenly the vidya is cheap and shitty and not as "real" in a sense. I know it's a profoundly illogical and retarded thing, but there you go. It's part of why I paid probably thousands of dollars over the years alongside refusing to rip people off and then become a blackhole in my now absent demand subtracting just a few more shekels from games I like getting made and the people who make what I like getting paid while shit companies with shit games make their money anyway. So I suppose that latter case could come into play too, to where it gets frowned upon to just download copies of some artistic work somebody likes rather than paying the artist. Whether this translates elsewhere is a different question though as it's definitely a Western and in particular American mentality about labor and markets and "I pay my own way" insistence on giving money which is completely absent from and mysterious to such peoples as Russians.