Morning Session Panel

live blogging AMRO

Bugs! We are now repeating the moth myth of why computers have “bugs”.

Debugging means being aware of hidden structures. We can easily lose sight of bigger pictures. So how do we identify hidden structures, zooming out of our practice?

Doom talk person: Our past haunts us.

Other doom talk person: She’s unemotional about bugs.

Reading group person: The bigger pictures are theoretical or practical. Is this a bug for you or a thing you haveto live with? Is it a problem to be solved? If there’s an attention crisis, is it a problem or just how thingsvare now?

Other reading group person: He is fascinated by assessing which theories are worthwhile as a form.of a debugging. Some theories are applicable to the world thatwe have now and some are not. The accelerationism framework seemed a very useful way to talk about modernity.

Time, for Time’s up: When they build a space they put in a lot detail to illuminate structures, but they also leave gaps. Their bar doesn’t have a price list because they don’t want to speculate about currency or political stability of existing structures. The price says too much that is too specific. They “unask” the question. The audience can build their own vision into those gaps.

The remote guy: Bugs could be exploited positively to bring about possible futures. They are an open scar where computational machines show vulnerability. But gorialls grooming are also debugging each other. To take the positive side, a bug is not a way to see a place for improvement, but an interruption that keeps us same. The dream of the virtual is interrupted and we are back in our real world. As long as there errors, we still have a reality to latch on to. We are saved from the Matrix.

Reafing group guy: We can’t always know what the solutions are fornour problems. We might replicate the problems we already have. Our understanding of what the bugs even are changes as we tackle the problem as they.move from sabstract to the real.

Q: How do limits create openness?

Reading group guy: Anarchist organisations are sometimes saturated by active individuals which can create informal hierarchies. Their app does not solve this problem but pushes it on to users after they match. They have not decided whether to intervene or how.

Other reading group guy: He was struck that the same ideas were raised in past centuries. Communism will organically arise from capitalism, according to Marx. But sometimes solutions are like “poetry will save us.” It won’t, but memes are a form of ideological warfare. Feedback loops can lead us someplace.

Q: Debugging is the identification of a mistake. Is that a part of your art practice?

Other doom woman: She exploited a system in the Austrian National Library to get a “publication” of a volunteer digitisation of an archive.

Doom woman: She has not specialised. But every project is about deconstructing tools. Is something a bug? Is it a feature? We create new fires by putting out old fires.

Q: Debugging contains bugging – being annoying and uncomfortable. Should we be bugs?

Remote guy: If we are to be bugs, it can make our artistic practice meaningful. What’s left after our bad ideas? We could abandon technologyand be anprims. A discourse emerged about this in regards to a 20th century Worlds Fair. Is technology a tool of war or neutral? The neutral camp won. But we try to use technology to solve the problems of technology. We can position ourselves outside thetechnological system in order to big it.

Tim: They’ve tried to put green tech into their experiences, but its annoyingly hard. Most of our tech tools haven’t been around long and won’t last. Political bugs have greater longevity.

Published by

Charles Céleste Hutchins

Supercolliding since 2003

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.