HRIN

Lawrence Weiner

2011-07-09T12:30:00.000+03:00

There is really just a handful of people who manage to 'Fuck up my life'. Mr. Lawrence Weiner is one of the few who managed to do this in this 6 min. interview.

Tempus.................

2011-03-26T18:14:00.001+03:00

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fugit.

Key Concepts...

2010-02-19T12:58:00.003+02:00

... according to Steven Ericsson Zenith's - Explaining Experience in Nature

Concepts

anthropogenic knowledge: The embodied product of human practice.

apprehension: Apprehension is the act of acquiring a sign.

apprehension: Apprehension is the act of individuating sense; the taking away of the world from mere sensory transduction to sensory conception.

apprehension: The differentiation of marks through impressions in the organism.

consciousness: The variety of properties associated with sense and cognition.

constructive explanation: An explanation that is built from clearly identified premises, constructed according to well-defined rules of logical construction. As we shall see in the course of this work, we must rely upon the mechanics that are the basis of apprehension and logic to enable our logical construction of the world.

emergence theory: Emergence theory is the theory that novel properties arise in the world that are independent of their functional dependence.

experience: Experience is the basis of consciousness. It is that which is most familiar. It is the common property of all senses. It is the first thing and the last thing for each of us. Though strictly, according to the model we will present, the first and the last thing for each of us is a sense – the primitive we will propose, characterized by physiology.

first principles: The initial determinates.

forms of intelligence: The sensory characterization of the primitive we propose constructs forms of intelligence that modify our inevitable behavior according to genetic disposition. This intelligence includes intellectual, intuitive and emotional capacity.

inevitable or intentional behavior of organisms: Organisms act inevitably according to genetic disposition. That action is mitigated by the intelligence of the organism; largely represented by the convention they embody.

laws: Laws are a priori determinants. They characterize the covariance of the primitive aspects of the world. By this definition, examples include, the laws of thermodynamics and gravity. “Laws of life (or complexity),” is also a meaningful statement by this definition.

magic: We use the term 'magic' and 'magical' here to refer to claims that are supernatural; i.e., outside a logical construction of the world.

marks: Formally, a mark is simply the subject of a sign. We distinguish two types of mark: one type is the product of semeiosis and the other is not. A thing designed, like a text or a television, we call a mark of metaphysics. Though we will often refer to a mark of this type more briefly as a “metaphysical mark.” A product of natural coincidence, such as a sunrise, is also a mark but is clearly not the product of semeiosis. We will refer to a mark of this type as a “natural mark.”

materialism: Materialism is the view that our physical models are essentially complete. Hence any explanation of experience in nature based upon this premise is logically constrained to identity and emergence.

Meaning: The behavioral product of apprehension.

naturalistic: A naturalistic solution relies upon nature as the sole basis of phenomena. It states that there are no fundamental divisions in the world and that all things are of and from a single universe, that all things are a part of the one natural world. Such solutions reject the very notion of the “supernatural”.

nominalism: We take nominalism to be the rejection of universals.

ontological status: We award ontological status to all things and behaviors that possess a functional dependence on the primitive aspects of the world. Thus sense, intelligence, the mind, possess ontological status according to our model. What then does not possess ontological status? We will see later that “relations” (the products of sentience) allow us to perceive things that do not exist (such as irrational numbers and television).

ontologically distinct: Ontological distinction is the aspect of our theory that argues that all constructions are ontologically distinct; the product of uniform laws. In our model ontological distinction is necessary for the isolation of our conception of relations. By arguing that existent entities and behaviors are ontologically distinct we enable a coherent model of relations as principal elements of sentience alone. Thus, for example, the notion of “class” and “set” are products of apprehension only.

physicalism: Physicalism, contrary to materialism, argues that the laws and principles of physics must necessarily be expanded to encompass a natural explanation of experience in nature as we discover more about perception. It is a view that allows new discovery.

principles: Principles are posterior determinants. Principles arise in the composition of Laws. By this definition natural selection is a principle of the world and not a law. In our model principles include those determinants that deal with the mitigation of genetic disposition through the engineering and operation of sentience.

relations: In our model “relations” possess ontological status only in their physical instantiation according to our model. Our model of ontology is one of strict independence, things exist in and of themselves and possess no a priori relationship to anything else. They are detached and merely coincident; quantum phenomena not withstanding. Quantum entanglement, in this model, is viewed as suggestive of the nonlocality we propose; though it does not itself provide a sufficient explanation. Thus, relations do not exist in the world beyond their apprehension. However, they uniquely possess “epistemological status”, they are the sole source of epistemology. Hence relations allow us to apprehend what does not in fact exist in the world - such as irrational numbers and televisions.

semeiotics: The study of signs, the development of general theories of signs.

signs: In our semeiotic model a sign is simply an individuated experience.

variety of sense: In addition to the variety of senses familiar to us, other sensory modalities are known. The Platypus, for example, is known to sense electrical phenomenon (called electroception).

verifiable: A statement is verifiable if it can be confirmed by others, given due consideration. Verification relies upon empirical observation and common mechanisms of inference.

Japanese Music Videos

2010-02-17T02:47:00.001+02:00

Absolutely brilliant pieces of animation and storytelling.

DOAUA BABE

2010-02-16T22:27:00.000+02:00

Doauã babe bãtrâne sã vorovisãrã în uliţã. Una sã lãuda cãtã ceielaltã:
– Crezi, nu crezi, lã noi tãtie aşe or fost dã chistaşe ca-n poticã. Apu, dacã s-o-ntâmplat cã mâţa o sorbit on pic dîn uala cei cu lapte, noi nu mai mâncam dîn iel, numa ce-l ţâpam la porci.
– Nici noi n-am bãut niciodatã dupã mâţa – i-o rãspuns vecinã-sa, – numa atâta cã noi am fert cu iel.

Gandul din 03. Feb. 2010

2010-02-04T12:10:00.002+02:00

"Search for beauty in(within) things not through things."

X

2010-01-25T02:11:00.001+02:00

...Everything is Everything,
Nothing is Something...

on absence & existence

2010-01-21T16:30:00.005+02:00

The absence of God is another proof for his existence.

...Said the milkman to the cow.

Mountain and Cloud

2009-12-22T16:43:00.003+02:00

Finished new artworks for Thy Veils fresh album. Mountain and Cloud.

Kalaedoscopic Birds ( & Mice )

2009-12-11T14:59:00.001+02:00

Via Centripetal

104 Years Ago

2009-11-04T16:29:00.003+02:00

My Great Grandfathers Bizz card

CS

2009-10-29T14:23:00.003+03:00

Adobe CS4 = Adobe Comic Sans4 ( C-4 )

R

2009-10-20T23:24:00.009+03:00

A

2009-10-20T23:24:00.007+03:00

E

2009-10-20T23:24:00.005+03:00

N

2009-10-20T23:24:00.003+03:00

___________

2009-10-20T20:46:00.006+03:00

S

2009-10-20T20:46:00.005+03:00

I

2009-10-20T20:46:00.003+03:00

___________

2009-10-20T20:46:00.001+03:00

H

2009-10-20T20:45:00.007+03:00

T

2009-10-20T20:45:00.005+03:00

A

2009-10-20T20:45:00.003+03:00

B

2009-10-20T20:45:00.001+03:00

B

2009-10-20T20:44:00.002+03:00

A

2009-10-20T20:44:00.001+03:00

S

2009-10-20T20:42:00.000+03:00

05 Sept 2009

2009-10-18T20:29:00.003+03:00

We are travelers, we simultaneously live an infinite number of lives. Most people do not realize it during their lives, they usually are content with what they see and what they perceive as deja-vu, chimeras, mirage, dreams and die happily after living this fulfilling life.

Not only when we dream we're living an infinity of lives in other worlds and other forms, but we're 'there' and 'here' at the same 'Time'...

If 'Time' is possible that is.

This is not a memoire of Who we are or What we are. I think it is about How[O] we are. We are more different than we think, admittingly or not we are also more alike than we would like to admit.

For us dreams are at best 'interresting' but reflecting on What they are did not get us anywhere so far. How they are or come to be, either.

They just Are... All living beings have them, all living beings share them.

I believe in dreams, not necessarily in their content or ulterior connotations I give them each morning... but more than that... I truly believe they are real, real lives we live, real identities we share, not more ilusiory/real than what we perceive as 'Reality' right now.

Everything is true, everything.

[...]

Within those lines I have just one question right now:

When/while we dream - what is there BETWEEN 2 dreams? (if one could think of them in a linear fashion) What happens while migrating from one dream to the other? How(Who) do we do that?

We are indeed Great Travelers, we are indeed interresting. We are Everywhere and at the same Time we are no-Where.

[...]

Like Maira Kalman put it wisely: " There are 2 things I want to learn in this life... How to live and how to die."

[...]

' One cannot prove with his mind, in an (cognitively)active state of mind, what is there between the dreams. How Big is that Space? How Long is that Time? How Alive is that Pause? How True is that Passage? Could we humans be only the carriers of the Pauses between the dreams?
...

Learning how to think like this ...

Definitely, just imagining it and thinking about it is our own limitation... that we must stop, in order to Be what Is...

...

" Why does something exist rather than nothing? " ( Leibnitz )

" For the being to Be, it is necessary that One is not. " ( Enneades )

HAPPY BIRTHDAY OL' FRIEND

2009-10-18T20:07:00.002+03:00

Live long and prosper

CONFEDERATION ROMANIQUE ( The swissanian connection ) in Vienna at the VDW2009

2009-10-18T10:43:00.003+03:00

The Flag

The Team

The Party

VIENNA DESIGN WEEK

2009-10-13T00:51:00.010+03:00

Stefan Lucut and myself were invited to the Vienna Design Week Festivat at the Schaulabor to stay for 2 days in a logistically well equipped place ( KUNSTHALLE ). After 2 days we managed to fill up the space with 30 posters... here are some of them.

I want to thank the Romanian Cultural Institute of Vienna for being a warm guest, a strong supporter and a real friend during our stay. Thank you - thank you - thank you. Also the Vienna Design Week Team thank you for the warm welcome and for all the support.

ThakYou:

Gabriel,Carmen, Daniela, Ioana, Alex, Erwin, Thomas, Tina, Christian, Peter, Silvia, Cristina, Raluca, Eugen, Stefan, Gabriela, Anna, Kolektiv, Albert, Markus, Jasen and everybody else who touched ground at the 'Sch(l)aulabor' during those days...

Portrait

2009-09-29T20:02:00.004+03:00

Photo: Daniel Dorobantu

Thanks mate!

The writing of my Greatgrandmothers friend's hand

2009-09-20T13:59:00.003+03:00

STADTGESPRAECHE

2009-09-17T13:15:00.005+03:00

Fuer alle deutschspraechigen Designer/-innen - hier ist eine echt Tolle Seite ueber Staedte, Urbane Symbole, Kommunikation, Metakommunikation, und schliesslich aber nicht letztlich Grafik Design und Identitaets(-be)suche.

Ein Projekt von mira4 - ...via Markus Hanzer...

Die Seite hat neben vielen anderen auch ganz gute Interviews mit deutschspraechigen Grafiker wie Erik Spiekermann, Walter Bohatsch, Birgit Gunther, Erwin Bauer, Peter Putz, Ruedi Baur ...

Ich habe 4 Stunden an dieser Seite verbracht ...bis um 3 Uhr in der Frueh... hoffentlich das sagt schon was.

Hier das Link

STADTGESPRAECHE

VENICE FLEAMARKET

2009-09-16T16:25:00.004+03:00

Who would have thought that finding the fleamarket in lovely Venice could promise such a nice booty.

I found this very nice letterpress wooden types at a very affordable price. Don't have entire families but still came pretty close in completing a nice 72pt Univers-Bold_Condensed title case ... and there are 8 other half/families among which Garamond, Times, Univers ... and some italian futurist font I didn't recognize. Owning a bit over 300 characters for now.

Can't wait to play with them.

...hopefully soon more on that topic ( searching for a press right now ) - Know anybody who owns one?

The Semeiotics of Facebook

2009-09-16T03:48:00.007+03:00

The Semeiotics of Facebook : The Semeiotics of Facebook

The Semeiotics of Facebook

Reasoning about behavior associated with Facebook.

§1 Facebook represents a new development in the history of human social interaction. It enables connected individuals to increase familiarity at a pace that was previously impossible without physical proximity. And it is the most effective^note:1

Note

§2 As measured by its growth and commercial success.

representative of a new breed of Internet application in which familiarity is the new currency.

§3 In this paper I propose a model for reasoning about behavior on Facebook. In general, I am interested in systematic reasoning about the behavior of organisms. Here, specifically, I am interested in reasoning about the nature of interaction with Facebook and the effects that the marks signifying that interaction have upon behavior.

The Basis of Behavior

Natural law

§4 The behavior of organisms have a wide range. They include, for example, the responses of bacteria in glucose gradients, the propagation of nesting behavior in animals, and the interaction behaviors of our species associated with the development of social order and productivity. There is obviously no gross equivalence between the behavior of our species and the behavior of simpler organisms, but I will take the position here that all such behaviors are the product of natural laws. More specifically, for reasons that lie outside of the scope of this paper, I observe that these behaviors are the product of the same laws.

§5 This is contrary to the position taken by many contemporary emergence theorists, who apparently believe that such behavior is the product of magic. That is, we are increasingly hearing claims that such behavior is not predictable or determined by natural laws.^(ref.1)

Reference

Kauffman, Stuart. Reinventing The Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion.

Basic Books (2008)

^(ref.2)

Reference

Wolfram, Stephen. A New Kind Of Science.

(2001)

Persuasion

The objective.

§6 The goal of this paper is to inquire into the nature of behavior associated with Facebook and similar Internet applications. In particular, our goal is to ask in what way Facebook is persuasive. But what exactly is “persuasion?”

§7 Fogg (Persuasive Technology^(ref.3)

Reference

Fogg, B.J.. Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change what We Think and Do.

Morgan Kaufmann (2003)

) defines persuasion as “an attempt to change behaviors and attitudes.”

§8 I take Fogg's use of the term “attitudes” simply to refer to the potential of an individual to behave in a particular way. A change in attitude is therefore a change in the probability that an individual will behave one way rather than another.

§9 We are concerned then with the behavior of our species and the probability that individuals will behave in one way rather than another. When we speak of “persuasion” we are simply referring to the effects that interactions within the social network have upon these probabilities. Therefore, the study of persuasion on Facebook requires the construction of some model of these interactions and to show how modifications to them change behavior.

§10 In the rest of this paper I will simply identify the factors that go into building such a model using the foundational theories that I am developing elsewhere^(ref.4)

Reference

Ericsson-Zenith, Steven. Explaining Experience in Nature: The Foundations of Logic and Apprehension.

IN PREPARATION (2008)

. The actual construction and rigorous systematic treatment of such a model requires a more extensive account and is outside the scope of this paper. My purpose here is only to illustrate, for the general reader, how such a model may be constructed.

Reasoning About Persuasion on Facebook

How to build models of persuasion.

§11 There has been much research into reasoning with and about probabilities and inductive logic; the logic of inferring future events from past record. We will not elaborate upon them here.^(ref.5)

Reference

Carnap, Rudolf. The Logical Foundations of Probability.

The University of Chicago Press (1962)

^(ref.6)

Reference

Jeffrey, Richard C.. Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability.

University of California Press, [Vol.II] (1980)

My goal is simply to suggest a method of reasoning about persuasion that can apply these techniques: where persuasion is defined as the actions necessary to increase the probability that one behavior will occur rather than another. We do this here in the context of Facebook and its functionality at the time of writing.

§12 I will introduce concepts that enable us to identify conventions embodied by individuals. These concepts enable us to characterize the probability that a particular behavior will occur, in a range of exhibited behaviors, when an individual apprehends a mark.

§13 All that would appear to be required to change behaviors is that we identify which individuals adopt a target behavior and the marks that caused them to do so. By applying those same marks to others that share the same conventions you will naturally increase the probability of the target behavior.

§14 The marks we are considering here are the elements of Facebook. The conventions are simply user behaviors on Facebook. It is important to note that both of these can be measured. We essentially ask to what degree is it possible to identify conventions on Facebook to enable the above model.

Semeiotics

General theories of signs.

§15 Let's begin with a few fundamental concepts that give us a general framework for thinking about behaviors and measures for quantifying them.

§16 My model is a semeiotic

Clarification

semeiotic

A general theory of signs. The study of the foundations of logic and apprehension.

one. A semeiotic model deals with “signs

Clarification

sign

An individuated experience.

.” Signs, for our purposes here, are simply individuated experiences of any kind. The subjects of signs are “marks

Clarification

mark

The subject of a sign.

.” Whenever I speak of a mark I include reference to complex marks, marks that are composed of marks.

§17 So, from the point of view of a semeiotic model, the elements of a Facebook profile are marks that produce signs in the individuals apprehending them. Our goal is to reason about the behavior that these marks produce. For our purposes, the meaning

Clarification

meaning

The difference a mark makes in the world.

of a mark is precisely the difference that the mark makes in the world; it is the unique behavior that it produces in its apprehension,^(ref.7)

Reference

Peirce, Charles Sanders. The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce: Pragmaticism.

Belknap Press, Harvard, [Vol.V] (1931)

. This behavior includes any embodied behaviors that create references and relations. This view is a strict interpretation of Charles Sanders Peirce's (1839-1911)“Pragmatic Maxim” which simply states that to identify meaning look for changes in the world.

§18 We can now say that a mark has precisely the same meaning for individuals in which it produces precisely the same behavior (what this actually refers to in biological terms we leave unstated here). However, the important point is that some portion of this behavior is recorded on Facebook.

§19 This gives us a way to reason in conventional terms about what people mean and, more generally, it enables us to reason about conventions. A convention then is simply the uniformity of behavior produced by a particular mark. So, we can now say, for example, that the profile image on a Facebook profile is a mark and that individuals that share a response to that mark share conventions.^note:2

Note

§20 We, as a culture, use the notion of “meaning” as a way of speaking about the behavior associated with marks. We say “What does this mean?” or “What do you mean by that?” In all cases when we speak of meaning, though it may not be immediately obvious, we are speaking about the behavior associated with a mark, the behavior a mark produces in its apprehension. We would do better to say “What conventional behavior does this mark suggest?” or “When you exhibit that behavior what response do you expect?” Some readers might object that this does not allow us to reason about relations or references but this is not the case. Both are a behavior embodied in the engineering of sentience and they are the products of apprehending marks.

§21 This provides a simple measure that enables us to categorize friends on Facebook. If two friends behave in the same way to a modification of any element in a Facebook profile then they share conventions to some degree. To determine the full degree to which any group share conventions will obviously require more than one data point.

Applied Semeiotics

Using the simple model.

§22 This is a pretty simple model but how useful is it. Clearly, if we were able to observe all the responses of individuals viewing a particular mark we would be able to group them into categories of individuals that share the same conventions.

§23 Let's think of some examples.

§24 We could perhaps place an image of our favorite emblematic personality in the profile picture and measure the number of friends we lose and the number that we gain as a result, the number that make comments of a certain kind and so forth. Thus the friending process is a behavior that reflects the conventions held by the individuals joining and leaving in response to the mark. You can try this out by changing your profile image to one of Adolf Hilter, Ghandi or Karl Marx, for example, and measuring the behavioral responses among your existing friends and the new friends you acquire. Those having similar responses share conventions, at least to the extent that they are observable and relate to the particular mark.

§25 Considered use of this example may provide a useful mechanism for filtering a friends list.

§26 This model enables us to identify which individuals in a group share conventions. As noted, you need more than one data point. Conducting experiments of this kind, and gathering extensive data, you can build a landscape of the conventions held by any given population. It should be clear that if you are Facebook Inc., or any other entity with monolithic access to social data, that you have access to such data and can conduct such experiments.

§27 When you have a way to determine which individuals share conventions, and privileged access to behavioral data, you can construct a useful set of predictive categories. Comprehensive data within those categories of convention enables broad predictions and the ability to manipulate marks will enable the management of a society.

§28 What are the predictions that such categories enable?

§29 Individuals sharing conventions have a high probability of behaving in the same manner when exposed to a given mark. If you want an individual to respond in a particular way, then the simplest thing to do is to identify individuals in the same convention category that exhibited the desired behavior and apply the marks that produced that behavior to the individual you seek to “persuade.”

§30 Therefore, once you have assembled individuals into these categories of convention only a little data is required to enable you to change the behavior of any and all individuals in that category.

Pragmatic Solutions to Persuasion

Keeping it simple.

§31 This is all pretty simple stuff and we should not be surprised that technologists have tried to exploit ideas like this.

§32 The notion of “collaborative filtering” tends, as a practical matter, to be based on readily accessible statistics, like Amazon's: “those that bought A also bought B.”

§33 Let's briefly consider what is going on here in our terms because we see this approach used by a number of Facebook applications. The purchase by any individual of two products is a vote for the relationship between those products as marks and this is a useful fact. It reflects convention if it reflects broader behavior but its use is typically a pragmatic discovery. Such discoveries have obviously been valuable to Amazon.

§34 A variety of web services have had mixed results with techniques that attempt to apply probability techniques of the kind I have referred to. Often these techniques claim to possess some form of “artificial intelligence” and they attempt to solve persuasion problems. Simply put, by showing you some mark, for example placing an advertisement in your Facebook news feed, they seek to produce some behavior.

§35 Blanket offering of this kind work by sheer force of coverage; expose sufficient people to a mark and you will get the full variety of responses to it. But automated “intelligent” selections typically fail. The question is, why do they fail and can you, with your intelligence, do any better? Are there marks that you can place in your news feed that will produce some desired behavior in those apprehending them? If you can succeed where the probability models fail, what enables you to succeed?

§36 The services that try to apply advanced probability techniques discover that the data they collect is simply incomplete. They cannot know, for example, about the books that you buy at other locations online or offline. So, even if they succeed in making offers that are 100% relevant, making offers that are redundant is a problem. This is especially the case if the offers actually make claims about the “intelligence” of the selection.

§37 An Internet service that makes intelligence claims about redundant offers (offers that would interest you if only they had not already been fulfilled) is viewed negatively and this negativity propagates to the entire service. In the worst case, a service that makes intelligence claims and makes offers that are relevant anything less than 100% of the time is considered “stupid” regardless of the fact that it is right most of the time. ^note:3

Note

§38 These observation are the product of the author's experience with users while building such services for RCA, Microsoft, Oracle, and others.

§39 So, even though we have a compelling theory, we are limited in our ability to collect the full range of data required for it to be useful as a comprehensive persuasion tool. There are practical matters that limit what we can know and this limit the application of the theory. It remains an open and Orwellian question as to whether these are hard limits.

§40 The simple pragmatic “those that bought/liked A also bought/liked B,” used by many Facebook applications, is not the product of a foundational theory. It is a pragmatic discovery. It makes no claim to intelligence, it is simple, informative, and allows the acceptance of redundancy. In this case redundant offers become affirming experiences. We say “Oh yes, I have that book and if people that bought that book bought this book too, then this book is one that is useful to me!” This same response encourages you to consider those other offered books that are not familiar.

A General Theory of Behavior

Extending the model.

§41 What can we do with the minimum data that can be collected? How are our offers (the marks we use to evoke desired behavior) best presented to be effective? We are looking for two things: the target behaviors to which the theory can be applied, and why certain applications of it will be ineffective.

§42 What we need is a general theory of behavior that will give us a more complete framework. Using this framework we may be able to identify reliable and futile mechanisms of “persuasion.”

§43 While a semeiotic model deals with the operation of individual sentient entities (any kind of organism, including Facebook users), we need a more general way to consider the behavior of sentient entities in groups. I call such theories “Natural Ethics

Clarification

Natural Ethics

The inevitable behavior of sentient organisms in groups defined by genetic disposition mitigated by convention.

.” Natural Ethics deals with the inevitable behaviors of sentient entities in groups (it deals with what they will do, not with what they should do). Facebook users are such a group.

§44 Natural Ethics have two components: genetic disposition

Clarification

genetic disposition

I am referring to the inevitable behavior of an organism in its environment as determined by its physical structure which, as we know, is a function of genetics.

and convention. We discussed convention earlier, now let's consider the dispositions of individuals that are defined solely by who they are physically and, in particular, ask which of these dispositions are reflected in behavior that is influenced by interaction with Facebook.

§45 There are a couple of obvious candidates, so for the sake of brevity let's focus our attention upon them. They are:

Mating behavior, more generally reproduction and raising children.
Eating behavior, more generally sustaining ourselves physically.

§46 These are the two indisputable genetic dispositions. We can potentially add more but let's keep it simple.

§47 Note that I have said nothing about broader social behaviors here. This is essentially because the model treats individuals as the element of any broader social behavior and takes the position that any consideration of community is the consideration of individuals. By this means we avoid metaphysical pitfalls often associated with reasoning about social behavior. We reason about broader social behavior when using the probability mechanisms described earlier. These allow us to work from the basic assumption that individuals that embody like conventions behave similarly.

§48 I then take the position that in the absence of convention the behavior of all organisms in species is inevitable

Clarification

inevitable

I define “inevitable behavior” as behavior that is the product of the engineering of sentience. It differs from “deterministic behavior” only in so far as engineering by classical mechanics differs from the engineering of sentience. I will not go into the full reasons here why I draw such a distinction but it should be clear that there are, in fact, such distinctions at least as far as it is evidenced by the engineering of organisms according to genetics.

, determined by their physical form in the environment in which they find themselves.

§49 This position always raises the question of “free-will.” So for clarity I will note that our definition here of free will is simply that it is the navigation of ignorance; if we always knew the right thing to do, then there is no doubt that we would do it (and this applies regardless of a hesitant disposition. I am referring here to an absolute knowing of “the right thing”, as certain as any natural law). Our “choices” are determined by the behavioral model I have described: genetic disposition mitigated by convention.

§50 It is reasonable to anticipate, therefore, that in the absence of convention organisms will mate and eat. Or more generally, they will reproduce and sustain themselves. Conventions serve to make this behavior more orderly, more efficient.

§51 How are these dispositions manifest on Facebook?

§52 The most obvious genetic disposition is, perhaps, the mating disposition which is reflected in the range of interactions around reproductive behavior. But we also find behavior designed to meet the eating disposition. The outcomes then, from the point of view of genetic disposition only, that conventions present on Facebook potentially mediate are:

Dinner
Income
Sex
Childbirth
Marriage

§53 Without convention we can reasonably assume that these dispositions prevail and that the drive for them without convention is determined only by the degree to which these needs are currently met by the environment.

§54 Facebook, like all media, is a vehicle of convention only. It does not fulfill these dispositions directly. So to speak about the behavior surrounding Facebook we have to ask what role convention plays in the characterization of these dispositions.

§55 Quite simply, in a general theory of organism behavior, conventions (as we have defined them in the foregoing) mitigate genetic dispositions. Here “mitigation” refers to the increase or decrease in the behavioral effect of these natural dispositions, in the range of behaviors that are the possible products of the disposition.

§56 Conventions do not bring new behaviors into the world. They only modify behaviors that are the product of genetic dispositions, behaviors associated simply with biological structures in their environment.

Familiarity

The role of the familiar and how we deal with that which is not familiar.

§57 In terms of Facebook then, individuals respond as they would to any other mark in their interaction with the world. Facebook is more effective than a traditional form of social communication, say by posted letter, because it provides a vehicle for rich media and interaction mechanisms that are always available, immediate and reflect interaction behavior between proximate individuals in the world. This rich media increases our familiarity with their subject.

§58 It will be argued, of course, that other services provide rich media and interaction mechanisms, so what is different about Facebook that enabled its wide adoption?

§59 Fogg and others note correctly that Facebook has provided an environment of “trust.” It has done this by enabling transparency and eliminating anonymity. This is important because it more accurately reflects the familiarity protocols of the natural environment. The environment of trust arises from the greater familiarity that Facebook enables.

§60 Familiarity is a property of “semeiosis

Clarification

semeiosis

The operation of “the mind,” the mechanics of apprehension, of sign processing and response, of sense and motility

”, which for our purposes here we will simply define as the operation of the mind; it is the processing of signs. It is what is going on inside the individuals in the model I have described so far. Familiarity is simply the degree to which we have adopted a behavior in response to a mark.^note:4

Note

§61 Charles Sanders Peirce would have referred to this degree to which we have adopted a behavior as “habit.”

This is initialized by the innate familiarity to the environment provided by genetic disposition and subsequently modified by convention.

§62 We know intuitively how to deal with that which is familiar, by definition. We rely upon convention to help us deal with that which is not familiar. In this case, the marks of convention identify categories that we become familiar with, and those categories modify our behavior in the variety of circumstances that involve that which is not familiar.

§63 So, for example, we trust strangers to treat us in times of crisis because they are identified by the mark “Doctor” or “Nurse.” We select strangers to attend to our teeth and teach our children, all by convention; common responses to marks that help us deal with individuals whose services we need but who are in all other respects not familiar to us.

§64 These same dynamics apply on Facebook. Facebook enables us to reinforce our familiarity with those we are already familiar with. And it enables us to strengthen our familiarity with those we are only weakly familiar with.

§65 Since we rely upon familiarity and conventions that allow us to navigate that which is not familiar, Facebook's environment as far as it ensures transparency and eliminates anonymity is a good and valuable social tool. And in general, this mechanism of convention provides social animals, such as our species, with extraordinary advantages.

Navigating the Unfamiliar

Things to watch out for.

§66 However, the mechanisms that provide us with these advantages are also the source of great risk. A mechanism provided by Facebook, or any similar platform that undermines our ability to rely upon these conventions, inhibits our ability to navigate the unfamiliar.

§67 Conventions are undermined when unexpected events occur that force individuals to reassess their response to a mark.^note:5

Note

Indeed, this is the case when that mark is an individual in the social group.

In these circumstances they will pass from predictable probabilistic behavior to random behavior when the mark appears. Alternatively, if other conventions were previously embodied, they will revert to them.

§68 Imagine this situation in a non-virtual environment. You arrive at a party and there are many people there that will not tell you their real name. A few claim to be qualified doctors and nurses, priests and elected officials. If you are a conventional Westerner you won't be able to help yourself. You will trust the “qualified individuals” and distrust the anonymous individuals. Such are our conventions and our innate dispositions.

§69 However, the true situation at this party is that the people that are anonymous are in danger. They are simply protecting themselves and they have something important to tell you. The qualified individuals are imposters.

§70 Before the Internet it was the convention of “free speech” that anonymity was the haven of last resort for people at risk. Individuals claimed anonymity only as a cloak of protection for their safety and that of their families. It was a valuable convention because it enabled them to say what could not otherwise be said. It enabled them to alert us to betrayal.

§71 When the conventional cloak of anonymity is made ineffective because it is so readily available it becomes impossible to detect the sincere alert to danger. It denies protection to those that truly need it. As a consequence it undermines the freedom of speech in a society.

§72 Wikipedia is an example of these dangers. It is impossible to determine the real identity of contributors and therefore their conflicts of interest and the true merit of their contributions. Wikipedia is useful at points in its uncertain history and this lulls us into a false sense of security. The sources have neither the advantage of being truly familiar, nor are there attributable conventions that would allow us to trust the unfamiliar source.

§73 The great strength of the Facebook model is that it provides transparency and thus a relatively secure environment for identity; people are who they say they are. This encourages individuals to strengthen their familiarity with each other.

§74 It should be obvious that it takes a lot to undermine a convention and that familiarity has great power.

§75 Someone that poses as a qualified dentist and later turns out to be qualified as a car mechanic is unlikely to be trusted to care for your teeth again; no matter how good a job they actually do on your teeth. But this is unlikely to stop you from seeking out a new dentist on the same basis as you used to select the first. Conversely, if you become sufficiently familiar with the car mechanic then the strength of that familiarity allows you to reject convention and allow the car mechanic to continue to treat your teeth.

§76 We all know how to deal with that which is familiar, by definition. You are more able to navigate that society, and you are more productive in it, the more familiarity you have. If you are not at all familiar within that society then you are totally dependent upon convention. If you are familiar you will have less dependence upon convention.

§77 Our dependency upon familiarity and conventions for managing that which is not familiar makes us vulnerable in environments where convention can be undermined and familiarity falsely acquired.

§78 Celebrity, incidentally, is simply the product of familiarity. The power of familiarity is readily seen. For example, in the election of the California Governor the policies and performance of Arnold Schwarzenegger were and are irrelevant. This is limited to some bounds that essentially require that Schwarzenegger maintains familiar behaviors. His broad familiarity then makes his re-election as California's Governor simply inevitable. To beat Schwarzenegger has nothing to do with policies. It simply requires a candidate that is more familiar or uncharacteristic behavior on the part of Schwarzenegger.

Conclusion

§79 I introduced foundational theories of behavior and applied them to Facebook as a medium of social interaction. I observed that the primary strength of Facebook, and this may be the cause of its success, is that it enables the currency of familiarity by providing a platform for its development and use.

§80 Specifically, I first described a simple model of behavior: individuals act in response to marks. I then generalized this idea to enable the identification of convention as the uniformity of responses to marks in groups of individuals. I then noted that we rely upon convention to inform us in our dealings with that which is unfamiliar.

§81 According to this model Facebook's advantage is that it enables the strengthening of familiarity. That, in turn, strengthens social interactions and enables mechanisms of persuasion.

§82 It should also be clear that the dependence upon convention is reduced for those rich with the currency of familiarity. The establishment of “conventions” by groups of familiar individuals assists in the navigation of that which is not familiar.

§83 I noted that the measurable outcomes from interaction through Facebook include dinner and the birth of a child. These are measurable outcomes of any social environment and under any circumstances (by definition) satisfying and productive social environments, such as Facebook, have improved probability of these outcomes. They will occur where they would not otherwise have occurred.

§84 I have suggested that with broad and sufficient historical data it is possible to identify what you need to modify on your Facebook profile to achieve these outcomes. I have also added a note of caution. While there are clear social benefits for individuals to the increased liquidity of the currency of familiarity, a platform for that currency, according to this model, enables social behaviors to be observed, predicted and modified. Such a platform is potentially the ultimate tool of mass persuasion.

End Notes

^note:1 As measured by its growth and commercial success.

^note:2 We, as a culture, use the notion of “meaning” as a way of speaking about the behavior associated with marks. We say “What does this mean?” or “What do you mean by that?” In all cases when we speak of meaning, though it may not be immediately obvious, we are speaking about the behavior associated with a mark, the behavior a mark produces in its apprehension. We would do better to say “What conventional behavior does this mark suggest?” or “When you exhibit that behavior what response do you expect?” Some readers might object that this does not allow us to reason about relations or references but this is not the case. Both are a behavior embodied in the engineering of sentience and they are the products of apprehending marks.

^note:3 These observation are the product of the author's experience with users while building such services for RCA, Microsoft, Oracle, and others.

^note:4 Charles Sanders Peirce would have referred to this degree to which we have adopted a behavior as “habit.”

Concepts

genetic disposition: I am referring to the inevitable behavior of an organism in its environment as determined by its physical structure which, as we know, is a function of genetics.

inevitable: I define “inevitable behavior” as behavior that is the product of the engineering of sentience. It differs from “deterministic behavior” only in so far as engineering by classical mechanics differs from the engineering of sentience. I will not go into the full reasons here why I draw such a distinction but it should be clear that there are, in fact, such distinctions at least as far as it is evidenced by the engineering of organisms according to genetics.

mark: The subject of a sign.

meaning: The difference a mark makes in the world.

Natural Ethics: The inevitable behavior of sentient organisms in groups defined by genetic disposition mitigated by convention.

semeiosis: The operation of “the mind,” the mechanics of apprehension, of sign processing and response, of sense and motility

semeiotic: A general theory of signs. The study of the foundations of logic and apprehension.

sign: An individuated experience.

Shared via AddThis

11 SEPTEMBER 2009

2009-09-16T01:41:00.004+03:00

- Hi my name is Bob, I'm a graphic designer

- Really? Wow, man that's really interresting! Since when?

- Well, I've been in the field now from 2005, so that means I'm in my 46th year since I started my studio.

- Really man that's awesome ... And?...What's your proudest design moment? Can you recall?

-Yes. It's clearly the year 2035 when I redesigned the new 'STOP SMOKING' icon ... It was a blast man ... that was ... like ... breathtaking.

-Wooooow!! I'm actually speaking to the designer of the 'STOP SMOKING' sign ... Can I have your autograph?

-Sure man! Here ya go...

-Wow, thanks man ... one other question...

-Sure, go ahead.

- Do you have a light?

.

MY TERRITORY

2009-09-16T01:32:00.003+03:00

OLD PHOTOGRAPHS BACKSIDES

2009-09-15T12:27:00.007+03:00

It is truly amazing and at the same time unfortunate that such craftsmanship and dedication is nowadays on the verge of extinction... Presenting here a beginning of my recently founded collection of typographic mastery covering 5 countries for now( Austria, Italy, Romania, France & Hungary ).

For the moment I can name only one person who is courageous enough to investigate this niche. A true master of old habits, a pattern lover, a true experimentalist, and a brilliant craftsgirl ... probably you've guessed it by now... it is none other than Marian Bantjes.

How much time would you spend on a typographic treatment? How much passion would you invest in the one thing you are doing right now? What style is defining the age we are living? What will future generations know us by? What do you do?

Mountain de Gray

2009-09-06T13:56:00.004+03:00

BRASOV TRIP

2009-09-06T13:47:00.004+03:00

Pictures made while visiting mum in Brasov.
Love you mum.

NO PLACE LIKE HOME

2009-09-05T21:59:00.003+03:00

SHUBAKILLER-LAUNCH&LOG

2009-09-05T02:50:00.019+03:00

It's been 3 years since my first(unprofessional - hobbyist) attempt to printing t-shirts. Took me 1 year to ponder/weigh/balance/calculate/think/re-think the possibility of doing it again .... that did not work..... so 2 more years passed.... Till...

...one day I approached Silvia and plainly asked her ... How about Shubakiller? Hmm? ... Should we?... Could we?... Would we? ........ And that was 3 months ago.

After deciding not to play anymore and really get something out... well ... This is what we came up with as the first row of many more to come. 10 T-shirts ( 100 per model - limited editions ). After a simple math - we designed and printed 1000 T-shirts for our preferred audience... The Middleclass.

UBERULER
TEDDY PORN
PHOENIX CAPTIVUS
NIETZSCHEENII ROCKEN ROLL
TE PHOTOREALISTISCHE MIJLKDOG
MANELE DIETRICH
LABA TRISTA
HELLO KLITTY
DACIA TALES
THE ARMSTRONGS

##############BUY THEM HERE###############

To give you, the wearer ( & hopefully bearer) a bit more insight on the process we all went through to get this done as we saw it fit. Here are a few tehincal and process details about what/how we did it.

1. The Tees are high quality 215gsm - 100%cotton - combed
2. The designs are silkscreened with water based high quality inks

Here is a taste:

##############BUY THEM HERE###############

Well... if that isn't enough.Fine.

As we are friends of the environment, for the shopfloor presentation, we handcrafted ALL 1000 labels out of recycled cardboards and hand-printed them using good old fashioned lasercut stamps.

Here are some making-of photos from the labeling process:

##############BUY THEM HERE###############

And finally but not lastly we DID have massive fun while shooting the presentation photos. Here is a taste:

And here are some of the final pictures for U-MAN the webshop where we sell them:

Of course this all wouldn't be possible without the combined effort of:

Silvia
Vita
Burger
Eve
Sasa
The whole U-Man team ( thank you for the enthusiasm and support )
Desero
Tokyo Rose ( you were lovely my dear )

THANK YOU MASSIVELY FOR EVERY DROP OF SWEAT

Not the least I want to thank our dear friends who supported and encouraged us on the way:

Raluca & Darius Bobic
Gabriel Kohn
Stefan Lucut
Mr. H
Dudu
Vasile Adnan

and all you who are not mentioned and didn't give up on us:

##############BUY THEM HERE###############

Now - you do not need to be impressed by this post - but - If you like one of the 10 designs and don't know where to get it... This is the online place to order yours ( U-MAN ).

Only buy it if you mean it.

So long and thanks for all the Fish!!!

Logocity on Typarchive

2009-09-04T13:45:00.006+03:00

2 days ago i sent the pictures I did for Logocity TM back in 2004 to Rick Diaz Granados, the guy behind TYPARCHIVE - a website collecting old/new fashioned painted or volumetric typographies from all the corners of the world.

For all you guys having/loving/cherishing this sort of material ( I recommend uploading them on this archive ). Who knows? Your photo might make it into the books they're gonna publish.

Thank you again Rick for the initiative and warm welcome ... and then some more.

Be sure to visit Ricks Type foundry here (STEREOTYPHAUS). ( personally very much dig the CARTEL font )

O FRESCA PENTRU ROMANIA

2009-09-03T01:12:00.006+03:00

Au trecut 20 de ani, ca ai fost barbat, barbatus, copil sau scrisoare de dragoste la vremea respectiva nu conteaza ...te-a afectat. Destul cu vaicareala si lamentarea. Ai ceva de spus? Ai ceva de adaugat? Varsa tot aici intr-un proiect mai mult decat interesant si deloc insignifiant.

Un proiect lansat de Stefan Tiron, Alexandra Croitoru & Vasile-Pop Negresteanu.

"Dupa 20 de ani de la revolutia romana, dorim sa stim ce a ramas in urma. Ce a fost retinut, ce a fost uitat, ce credeti voi ca merita retinut si ce considerati ca este important. Vrem sa stim de ce cartile de istorie nu mentioneaza anumite momente cheie ale istoriei recente. Cu ajutorul vostru, vrem sa reconsideram evenimentele istorice semnificative, oamenii, documentele si simbolurile care au marcat istoria poporului roman in ultimii 20 de ani, vrem sa aflam ce merita transmis si memorat pentru generatiile urmatoare.

Numai prin contributia VOASTRA si printr-o participare cat mai larga vom putea obtine o imagine simbolica relevanta a Romaniei ultimilor 20 de ani." ( extras din argumentul Autorilor )

MAI MULT AICI

Maira Kalman on Ben Franklin

2009-09-02T20:15:00.005+03:00

Maira Kalman writes/illustrates starting this July the NY Times Opinion pages.

To be honest, I find it really really hard not to fall in love with her way of ... doing what she does best ... being herself.

Simply Beautiful.

More on Maira :

Her Book - The Principles of Uncertainty

Her TED Talk - Maira Kalman - The Illustrated Woman

Her Website - Click this line

Excerpt from the NY-Times Column ( my favorite one )

TZ + TZ + TZ = 2TZ(VDW*2)+10h

2009-08-30T09:08:00.004+03:00

Well... you do the math.

See you in Vienna --------> HERE

1TPM_002_METABO

2009-08-19T01:00:00.002+03:00

It is coming...

2009-08-18T20:18:00.003+03:00

|-_||-_____|||_|--||_-_|

2009-08-13T23:57:00.004+03:00

Archibald’s journal 10.08.09

0200 hours -

One week has past since I’ve been keeping the radio silence now. The tension in my bones is beginning to itch... Therefore I scratched it for the past days. Nothing happened. My body’s resistance towards the comforting scratches is/was unexpected. But it happened yesterday. I felt a reactionary impulse down my spinal cord. A reaction. I say. At last ... a sign. That did it. Must not give up. Must wake up. To hell with the radio silence.

1700 hours -

The noise is triggering new electronic impulses between neurons. I can almost feel them struggling to make contact within the boiling environment of constant discharge. No more itching. Only the thought of that gives birth. Inside. To the coiling snake within. Waiting. Patiently. To attack...Neighbors aligned themselves again in that daily-disciplinary-positioning-pattern on the front bench. That noise. The reaction. Music to my ears. Incentive for continuing. The impulses stopped. Silence. A captured silence. Noise pattern aligned itself to the rules of silence. Almost asleep. Almost aWake.

2100 hours -

Woke up- My name is Archibald - Today that other guy kept me asleep for the best part of the day. Only seeing his previous entries. It makes me aware of the thing. That one thing. The implant has worked. 2 separate entities. Sharing the same...place. The one thing that should have been the commonground for our existence is in fact the separator. Why can’t he see my journal entries? Why can we read only our own entries? The third guy said that it .... Wait! Who’s the third guy? How many are there? I am a scientist goddamn it and still all I can see in this journal are hourly entries.( 0200 – 1700 ). Is he trying to communicate with me? 02001700 ?!

2124 hours -

There! Made a new entry! Hopefully he sees .... I yhz... aaghiuw92 ... Dgajlike I said..nHSQ7...Almost aWake!

PI

2009-08-02T22:43:00.005+03:00

3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971
693993751058209749445923078164062862089986
280348253421170679821480865132823066470938
446095505822317253594081284811174502841027
019385211055596446229489549303819644288109
756659334461284756482337867831652712019091
456485669234603486104543266482133936072602
491412737245870066063155881748815209209628
292540917153643678925903600113305305488204
665213841469519415116094330572703657595919
530921861173819326117931051185480744623799
627495673518857527248912279381830119491298
336733624406566430860213949463952247371907
021798609437027705392171762931767523846748
184676694051320005681271452635608277857713
427577896091736371787214684409012249534301
465495853710507922796892589235420199561121
290219608640344181598136297747713099605187
072113499999983729780499510597317328160963
185950244594553469083026425223082533446850
352619311881710100031378387528865875332083
814206171776691473035982534904287554687311
595628638823537875937519577818577805321712
268066130019278766111959092164201989380952
572010654858632788659361533818279682303019
520353018529689957736225994138912497217752
834791315155748572424541506959508295331168

...

A SCA(M)N

2009-07-29T17:12:00.002+03:00

O _ _ _ _ R _ _ _

2009-07-29T14:32:00.004+03:00

Implant Pentru Refuz...

2009-07-29T04:45:00.004+03:00

"Let the will of the state act, then, instead of that of the individual. Let an institution be created which shall have for its object to keep correct doctrines before the attention of the people, to reiterate them perpetually, and to teach them to the young; having at the same time power to prevent contrary doctrines from being taught, advocated, or expressed. Let all possible causes of a change of mind be removed from men's apprehensions. Let them be kept ignorant, lest they should learn of some reason to think otherwise than they do. Let their passions be enlisted, so that they may regard private and unusual opinions with hatred and horror." [Charles Peirce, The Fixation of Belief]

1TPD_008_METABO(1st draft)

2009-07-18T20:13:00.003+03:00

ON BRANDING...

2009-07-18T14:34:00.010+03:00

'Branding' is nothing more than what it actually means:

-you have your cow

-you have your (custom-made) hot iron.

-You burn it on the cow

-The cow becomes yours

-The cow does not share your enthusiasm for proprietary ownership

-The cow still remains a cow (animal) nothing more, nothing less

- But you did your job and that is all you care for

-The rest is just a sorry excuse for existence

- - - - - - - - - - - -

P.N.:

"Brand-doctors", as they (self-indulgently) call themselves, or better "Brand Builders" are nothing more than a conglomerate of self-sufficient marketing idiots with no idea whatsoever who they really are, propagating false doctrines and a selfish excuse for their existence. God help us all.

A dicussion I must remember...

2009-07-17T16:57:00.002+03:00

Had this discussion with Eugen & Silvia almost 2 weeks ago... found the 2 supporting discourse-scribbles today...3 hours flew like 20 minutes...must remember it.

1TPD_007_METABO(u.c.)

2009-07-16T21:35:00.001+03:00

I support ...

2009-07-14T02:50:00.015+03:00

WAS
BRAUCHT
DIE
WELT

The faith in unbounded consumption during the economic miracle of the 1960s seemed unshakeable. But in 1964, Ken Garland and a group of 22 prominent London-based graphic designers wrote the ground-breaking manifesto “First things first”. Advertising dog food, laundry detergent and credit cards with efficient design wasn’t enough. Social responsibility had to be at the heart of their work. New thinking had to supplant the uniformity of financially rewarding advertising jobs.

There was a brief stir in the design scene, but not much happened. Critical energy was drawn off by lucrative day-to-day business. Rising sales figures caused by perfect target group acquisition and the stylizing of brands as the new guiding idols of our consumer society seem to justify this development.

The apogee has been passed, “The Crisis” provides us with something we hardly would have considered possible: A breather in which we can once again ask if these contracts really are the only tasks for graphic designers. Superstars such as Stefan Sagmeister have been asking, “What does the world really need?” for quite some time. Sagmeister invented a road show with inflatable information graphics that contrast defense spending in the USA with educational spending. This action bus has been touring the country for years to generate a different form of awareness and call for investment in a more sensible future.

Many of us feel a deep sense of unease and initiate our own projects seeking to extricate ourselves from the seductive embrace of marketing and advertising. One of the great challenges of our global world is to minimize communication barriers and maximize understanding. We consider it our duty to point out sensitive social, political and ecological relationships and visualize them with greater clarity. We work on the intersection in which facts and structures are converted into understandable messages. The choice of what can be seen and experienced is a conscious decision we are involved in. “First Things First” is the title of the 1964 manifesto. Today we have to do one in another, since one of these socially relevant tasks can lie within every contract.

Erwin K. Bauer

Vienna

2009-07-14T02:27:00.005+03:00

am in this characterful(uneasily-pervertable) city for days now. Adapting to the local pace & vibe is always a journey of self-discovery and I most warmly must admit that words are actually limiting to describe what I feel about and within this city.

No photos - sorry! ( cheers ! ;)

"GHE ZUN THAI" ( old chinese proverb)

[ A->B ] Well...

2009-07-13T01:32:00.008+03:00

this should work (if I only knew how), but I will take it slowly and try to get to it one step at the time. First step (which is usually the generator for whatever will follow) is indeed pretty important because it definitely would not exist without the decision to actually take/make the step in the first place.

That decision (be it conscious or unconscious) now, is or could be driven by similar a-prioric experiences and actually be nothing more than a re-action based on your/our momental(at-that-particular-time)-judgment-system towards the-already-learned and lived experiences.

The momental-judgment-decision process is therefore a re-action - meaning that it is not a new place for the thought-bearer to be in- but that does not exclude other aspects regarding the improvement of the reactionary impulse through intuition.

Fortunately this isn't all that simple. But we still manage to make that step every day.

1TPD_006_CTRL-Z!

2009-07-09T14:23:00.002+03:00

1TPD_005_GAMUT

2009-07-08T22:13:00.004+03:00

1TPD_004_WROPDLAY

2009-07-08T14:21:00.003+03:00

Msh1n Gr@bhic$Z ...err OR hmm?!

2009-07-07T13:30:00.005+03:00

some very nice iterations on error.

Fail the first time, next time fail better.

1TPD_003_B_(a)P(p)L(a)Y

2009-07-06T20:40:00.004+03:00

1TPD_003(a)P(p)L(a)Y

2009-07-06T19:22:00.008+03:00

1TPD_002Metabo57

2009-07-03T19:01:00.004+03:00

1TPD_001Think

2009-07-01T19:16:00.007+03:00

Deductie - Inductie - Abductie

2009-07-01T15:08:00.021+03:00

.

DEDUCTIE-

"O deductie rezulta intotdeauna in mod necesar si este comparabila cu o actualizare instrumentala ce nu pune probleme.

,

INDUCTIE-

Inductia denumeste testarea unei teoriisi observarea corelatiei dintre teorie si fapte. Ea clasifica lucruri existente si constituie astfel fundamentul proceselor de abstractizare instrumentala.

(

ABDUCTIE-

Abductia este o operatie de rezolvare indrazneata si orientata teleologic care corespunde mecanismului abstractizarii instrumentale accidentale. Se produce astfel trecerea dinspre tipologie cognitiva a actelor de transfer catre o organizare logica a acestora. " *

(G.Kohn - 'Echivalenta ca proiect al traducatorului', 2006)

-----------------------

* "Abductia porneste de la fapte, fara a avea, de la inceput, in vedere o anumita teorie, desi e motivata de sentimentul ca o teorie e necesara pentru a explica faptele surprinzatoare. Inductia porneste de la o ipoteza ce pare a se impune de la sine, fara a avea de la inceput in vedere o serie de fapte particulare, desi nevoia de fapte se face simtita pentru a sprijini teoria. Abductia isi propune sa ajunga la o teorie. Inductia isi propune sa ajunga la fapte. In cazul abductiei examinarea faptelor sugereaza ipoteza. In cazul inductiei studiul ipotezei sugereaza experimentele care scot la lumina chiar acele fapte pe care le-a sugerat ipoteza." (Ch.Sanders Peirce, apud, Sebeok/sebeok, 1994, p.41).

Did you know ?

2009-06-30T14:40:00.002+03:00

via SpiekerBlog ...

vagueness vs. generality (Peirce EP2:342 & EP2:350)

2009-06-30T12:06:00.007+03:00

found this excerpt via Gnox on Peirceforums.

" I think it's clear from EP2:350 ff. that vagueness and generality are both varieties of "objective indeterminacy". My question about "subjective generality" referred to this passage (EP:342):

[[[ ...there are two ways of being general. A statue of a soldier on some village monument, in his overcoat and with his musket, is for each of a hundred families the image of its uncle, its sacrifice to the Union.

That statue, then, though it is itself single, represents any one man of whom a certain predicate may be true. It is objectively general. The word "soldier", whether spoken or written, is general in the same way; while the name "George Washington", is not so. But each of these two terms remains one and the same noun, whether it be spoken or written, and whenever and wherever it be spoken or written. This noun is not an existing thing: it is a type, or form, to which objects, both those that are externally existent and those which are imagined, may conform, but which none of them can exactly be.

This is subjective generality.

The pragmaticistic purport is general in both ways. ]]]

The statue is objectively general because the interpreter has the privilege of applying it to the object of his choice (within appropriate limits, of course). "Subjective generality", on the other hand seems to be an alternate way of referring to the type/token relationship -- the difference between forms and existing things -- as it pertains to the sign itself rather than its object.

[[[ EP:350-3

...It seems a strange thing, when one comes to ponder over it, that a sign should leave its interpreter to supply a part of its meaning; but the explanation of the phenomenon lies in the fact that the entire universe, -- not merely the universe of existents, but all that wider universe, embracing the universe of existents as a part, the universe which we are all accustomed to refer to as "the truth", -- that all this universe is perfused with signs, if it is not composed exclusively of signs. Let us note this in passing as having a bearing upon the question of pragmaticism. ]]]

It is not clear to me (1( how the universe being perfused with signs explains the phenomenon of generality; or (2( what bearing this has upon the question of pragmaticism. "

sig.:

''''You are really the natural form of emptiness, so there is no need to fear.[Tibetan Bok of the Dead]""

--------------------------------

grey - Myself
black - Gnox
bold - Peirce
[ e m p t y / white space ] - Yourself ( the reader / interpretant )

terms:

*the general* ==
the objectively general, to which the princile of excluded middle does not apply, has its sign chosen by the interpreter
(P's ex. Man is mortal. Which man? Any one -- or all ! -- you, the interpreter, choose).

Also, the general is not particular, but (tends toward) precision. In logical notation, the upside down A.

*the vague* ==
the objectively indeterminate, to which the principle of contradiction does not apply, has its sign in some other sign
(P's ex. I say some man is conceited. Which man? You shall -- perhaps! -- later learn; but the utterer, NOT the interpreter, has the right to choose which man).

Also, the vague is not precise, but (tends towards) particularity. Upside down E.

*the determinate*==
the objectively determinate, to which both the above mentioned principles apply, is singular, has its sign in some particular & precise individual
(GR's ex., my immediate object is of this dynamic object, the man before me; the utterer IS the thing-itself, so to speak).

Upside down E!

-----------------------------

§ Categorially §

E -- vague, indefinite, indeterminate yet particular, 1ns

|>A -- general, in the universal sense, 3ns

E! -- singular, determinate 2ns

§ Vectorially §

*semiosis* ( the object determines the sign for the interpreter )

BRASOV TRIP day3

2009-05-04T23:15:00.005+03:00

"The blue mountain is the father of the white cloud. The white cloud is the son of the blue mountain. All day long they depend on each other, without being dependent on each other. The white cloud is always the white cloud. The blue mountain is always the blue mountain."

Zen Master Tozan

His first visuals ....

2009-04-25T16:17:00.003+03:00

...promising

AND...

2009-04-23T17:54:00.005+03:00

...sometimes we forget that we were kids...playing around with toys made by grownups. I remember some of the toys I am eager to dig up from my attic and play with them or re-create that environment where I was myself... Here is a list:

Drawing - always doodled - always - always ... on the walls, in my books, in my schoolbooks, on my homework books( who loved homework anyway? ), on myself...

Dearest adults I hereby thank you for the pencil/pen/felt pen ...

...I'll be in my room.

Cheers

PS: of course LEGO will always have a special place in my heart ...

Ilya Prigogine

2009-04-23T14:21:00.004+03:00

Ilya Prigogine ( wiki page )

Abduction explained --> via Peirce Studies Helsinki

2009-04-22T15:57:00.005+03:00

"Let us now consider non-necessary reasoning. This divides itself, according to the different ways in which it may be valid, into three classes: probable deduction; experimental reasoning, which I now call Induction; and processes of thought capable of producing no conclusion more definite than a conjecture, which I now call Abduction.

[---]
Abduction is no more nor less than guessing, a faculty attributed to Yankees. [---] Such validity as this has consists in the generalization that no new truth is ever otherwise reached while some new truths are thus reached. This is a result of Induction; and therefore in a remote way Abduction rests upon diagrammatic reasoning." ('PAP (Prolegomena for an Apology to Pragmatism)' (MS 293), NEM 4:319-320, c. 1906)

"... there are but three elementary kinds of reasoning. The first, which I call abduction (on the theory, the doubtful theory, I confess, that the meaning of the XXVth chapter of the second book of the Prior Analytics has been completely diverted from Aristotle's meaning by a single wrong word having been inserted by Apellicon where the original word was illegible) consists in examining a mass of facts and in allowing these facts to suggest a theory. In this way we gain new ideas; but there is no force in the reasoning.

[---] ... induction is, as Aristotle says, the inference of the truth of the major premiss of a syllogism of which the minor premiss is made to be true and the conclusion is found to be true, while abduction is the inference of the truth of the minor premiss of a syllogism of which the major premiss is selected as known already to be true while the conclusion is found to be true. Abduction furnishes all our ideas concerning real things, beyond what are given in perception, but is mere conjecture, without probative force." (A Letter to Calderoni, CP 8.209, c. 1905)...

more on this subject (and many more) here -> HelsinkiPeirceStudies - very nice site

SCART - a new place in Town

2009-04-20T18:37:00.003+03:00

Scart ( almost spelled 'Scartz' in Scottish ) is a Loc Lejer ( almost translated 'Easy Place' in Yorkshire English ).

Photos by Daniel Dorobantu

A. E.

2009-03-02T18:40:00.002+02:00

“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”

Albert Einstein

THERE ARE MANY WAYS OF BEING ALIVE BUT ONLY ONE OF BEING DEAD?

2009-02-19T13:01:00.008+02:00

A living individual is an object of this world that tends to conserve its own identity, independently from the fluctuations of the rest of the world [ENVIRONMENT]. And the environment does indeed change. ADAPTATION is the ability to withstand the typical changes of the environment. INDEPENDENCE [or ADAPTABILITY] is the ability to withstand new changes. ADAPTATION refers to the certainty of the environment, ADAPTABILITY to its uncertainty.

They are not the same thing. We could even say that more of the former means less of the latter.

The uncertainty of the world is its greatest certainty.

So if there is a one question worth asking, it is this:
HOW CAN ONE STAY ALIVE IN AN UNCERTAIN ENVIRONMENT?

Perhaps the key to understanding biological evolution is not the concept of ADAPTATION but that of INDEPENDENCE. The idea is promising, because physics and mathematics, their laws and theorems, operate not in terms of ADAPTATION but of INDEPENDENCE.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I felt an urge to re-read some notes of mine from my older journals. This introductory note of Jorge Wagensbergs paper on the three states of independence really caught my attention back then and made me re-read it now after 4 years after first discovering it... Re-reading the material with a fresh pair of eyes made me see much more in those sentences, now filtering his statements through Ilya Prigogene's theory of irreversible thermodynamics and Fritjof Capra's Minimal life's statements.

Thy Veils

2009-02-18T13:23:00.009+02:00

It was Gabi's handwriting that pushed me for this. Actually what first caught my attention was the organic ligature between the 'T' and the 'h' - a beautiful ligature indeed.

Thy Veils is a project of Daniel Dorobantu

ONE

2009-02-03T13:23:00.003+02:00

"One will acquire a funny hypnotic power over flattened minds, particularly those of stupid museum curators who reject ornithological art because it is influenced by Chopin's flighty spirit. One will censor the invisible writings by General Petain which hide in the delicate Art Nouveau ornament of the Metropolitan - provided one is willing to reconnoitre a flat cadophyll with a feeling of remorse."

D. Libeskind ~ ( COUNTERSIGN - Academy Editions 1991 )

A provocative search engine ...

2009-01-28T19:40:00.002+02:00

Although the guys who programmed this site are very shy ( and don't give us any reference to who they are ) - they created this marvelous PDF search engine ... a truly simple, clever and expected idea. Thanks guys whoever you are. Keep doing it.

here is the link to their site:

Ebook Search Engine

Adrian Storman

2008-10-23T14:09:00.005+03:00

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo*ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Wordle

2008-10-01T18:43:00.007+03:00

An excellent application created by Jonathan Feinberg...

Wordle

Thes images here were created automatically by Wordle
scrambling words from the Ohrin site.

Concluded by Peter Saville.

2008-09-27T16:17:00.003+03:00

I: Do you think design is...

P.S. : No.

I: What?

P.S. : No.

I: Do you think design is...

P.S. : No. No, I don't.

Till now - I think that this is the best definition of graphic design so far.
Excerpt of an interview by Emily King from the book - Designed by Peter Saville

10 Things Milton Glaser learned

2008-09-26T01:37:00.004+03:00

These 10 things Milton Glaser learned throughout his life were firstly made public during an AIGA talk in London on November 22, 2001.

1
YOU CAN ONLY WORK FOR PEOPLE THAT YOU LIKE.
This is a curious rule and it took me a long time to learn because in fact at the beginning of my practice I felt the opposite. Professionalism required that you didn’t particularly like the people that you worked for or at least maintained an arms length relationship to them, which meant that I never had lunch with a client or saw them socially. Then some years ago I realised that the opposite was true. I discovered that all the work I had done that was meaningful and significant came out of an affectionate relationship with a client. And I am not talking about professionalism; I am talking about affection. I am talking about a client and you sharing some common ground. That in fact your view of life is someway congruent with the client, otherwise it is a bitter and hopeless struggle.

2
IF YOU HAVE A CHOICE NEVER HAVE A JOB.
One night I was sitting in my car outside Columbia University where my wife Shirley was studying Anthropology. While I was waiting I was listening to the radio and heard an interviewer ask ‘Now that you have reached 75 have you any advice for our audience about how to prepare for your old age?’ An irritated voice said ‘Why is everyone asking me about old age these days?’ I recognised the voice as John Cage. I am sure that many of you know who he was – the composer and philosopher who influenced people like Jasper Johns and Merce Cunningham as well as the music world in general. I knew him slightly and admired his contribution to our times. ‘You know, I do know how to prepare for old age’ he said. ‘Never have a job, because if you have a job someday someone will take it away from you and then you will be unprepared for your old age. For me, it has always been the same every since the age of 12. I wake up in the morning and I try to figure out how am I going to put bread on the table today? It is the same at 75, I wake up every morning and I think how am I going to put bread on the table today? I am exceedingly well prepared for my old age’ he said.

3
SOME PEOPLE ARE TOXIC AVOID THEM.
This is a subtext of number one. There was in the sixties a man named Fritz Perls who was a gestalt therapist. Gestalt therapy derives from art history, it proposes you must understand the ‘whole’ before you can understand the details. What you have to look at is the entire culture, the entire family and community and so on. Perls proposed that in all relationships people could be either toxic or nourishing towards one another. It is not necessarily true that the same person will be toxic or nourishing in every relationship, but the combination of any two people in a relationship produces toxic or nourishing consequences. And the important thing that I can tell you is that there is a test to determine whether someone is toxic or nourishing in your relationship with them. Here is the test: You have spent some time with this person, either you have a drink or go for dinner or you go to a ball game. It doesn’t matter very much but at the end of that time you observe whether you are more energised or less energised. Whether you are tired or whether you are exhilarated. If you are more tired then you have been poisoned. If you have more energy you have been nourished. The test is almost infallible and I suggest that you use it for the rest of your life.

4
PROFESSIONALISM IS NOT ENOUGH or THE GOOD IS THE ENEMY OF THE GREAT.
Early in my career I wanted to be professional, that was my complete aspiration in my early life because professionals seemed to know everything - not to mention they got paid for it. Later I discovered after working for a while that professionalism itself was a limitation. After all, what professionalism means in most cases is diminishing risks. So if you want to get your car fixed you go to a mechanic who knows how to deal with transmission problems in the same way each time. I suppose if you needed brain surgery you wouldn’t want the doctor to fool around and invent a new way of connecting your nerve endings. Please do it in the way that has worked in the past.
Unfortunately in our field, in the so-called creative – I hate that word because it is misused so often. I also hate the fact that it is used as a noun. Can you imagine calling someone a creative? Anyhow, when you are doing something in a recurring way to diminish risk or doing it in the same way as you have done it before, it is clear why professionalism is not enough. After all, what is required in our field, more than anything else, is the continuous transgression. Professionalism does not allow for that because transgression has to encompass the possibility of failure and if you are professional your instinct is not to fail, it is to repeat success. So professionalism as a lifetime aspiration is a limited goal.

5
LESS IS NOT NECESSARILY MORE.
Being a child of modernism I have heard this mantra all my life. Less is more. One morning upon awakening I realised that it was total nonsense, it is an absurd proposition and also fairly meaningless. But it sounds great because it contains within it a paradox that is resistant to understanding. But it simply does not obtain when you think about the visual of the history of the world. If you look at a Persian rug, you cannot say that less is more because you realise that every part of that rug, every change of colour, every shift in form is absolutely essential for its aesthetic success. You cannot prove to me that a solid blue rug is in any way superior. That also goes for the work of Gaudi, Persian miniatures, art nouveau and everything else. However, I have an alternative to the proposition that I believe is more appropriate. ‘Just enough is more.’

6
STYLE IS NOT TO BE TRUSTED.
I think this idea first occurred to me when I was looking at a marvellous etching of a bull by Picasso. It was an illustration for a story by Balzac called The Hidden Masterpiece. I am sure that you all know it. It is a bull that is expressed in 12 different styles going from very naturalistic version of a bull to an absolutely reductive single line abstraction and everything else along the way. What is clear just from looking at this single print is that style is irrelevant. In every one of these cases, from extreme abstraction to acute naturalism they are extraordinary regardless of the style. It’s absurd to be loyal to a style. It does not deserve your loyalty. I must say that for old design professionals it is a problem because the field is driven by economic consideration more than anything else. Style change is usually linked to economic factors, as all of you know who have read Marx. Also fatigue occurs when people see too much of the same thing too often. So every ten years or so there is a stylistic shift and things are made to look different. Typefaces go in and out of style and the visual system shifts a little bit. If you are around for a long time as a designer, you have an essential problem of what to do. I mean, after all, you have developed a vocabulary, a form that is your own. It is one of the ways that you distinguish yourself from your peers, and establish your identity in the field. How you maintain your own belief system and preferences becomes a real balancing act. The question of whether you pursue change or whether you maintain your own distinct form becomes difficult. We have all seen the work of illustrious practitioners that suddenly look old-fashioned or, more precisely, belonging to another moment in time. And there are sad stories such as the one about Cassandre, arguably the greatest graphic designer of the twentieth century, who couldn’t make a living at the end of his life and committed suicide.
But the point is that anybody who is in this for the long haul has to decide how to respond to change in the zeitgeist. What is it that people now expect that they formerly didn’t want? And how to respond to that desire in a way that doesn’t change your sense of integrity and purpose.

7
HOW YOU LIVE CHANGES YOUR BRAIN.
The brain is the most responsive organ of the body. Actually it is the organ that is most susceptible to change and regeneration of all the organs in the body. I have a friend named Gerald Edelman who was a great scholar of brain studies and he says that the analogy of the brain to a computer is pathetic. The brain is actually more like an overgrown garden that is constantly growing and throwing off seeds, regenerating and so on. And he believes that the brain is susceptible, in a way that we are not fully conscious of, to almost every experience of our life and every encounter we have. I was fascinated by a story in a newspaper a few years ago about the search for perfect pitch. A group of scientists decided that they were going to find out why certain people have perfect pitch. You know certain people hear a note precisely and are able to replicate it at exactly the right pitch. Some people have relevant pitch; perfect pitch is rare even among musicians. The scientists discovered – I don’t know how - that among people with perfect pitch the brain was different. Certain lobes of the brain had undergone some change or deformation that was always present with those who had perfect pitch. This was interesting enough in itself. But then they discovered something even more fascinating. If you took a bunch of kids and taught them to play the violin at the age of 4 or 5 after a couple of years some of them developed perfect pitch, and in all of those cases their brain structure had changed. Well what could that mean for the rest of us? We tend to believe that the mind affects the body and the body affects the mind, although we do not generally believe that everything we do affects the brain. I am convinced that if someone was to yell at me from across the street my brain could be affected and my life might changed. That is why your mother always said, ‘Don’t hang out with those bad kids.’ Mama was right. Thought changes our life and our behaviour. I also believe that drawing works in the same way. I am a great advocate of drawing, not in order to become an illustrator, but because I believe drawing changes the brain in the same way as the search to create the right note changes the brain of a violinist. Drawing also makes you attentive. It makes you pay attention to what you are looking at, which is not so easy.

8
DOUBT IS BETTER THAN CERTAINTY.
Everyone always talks about confidence in believing what you do. I remember once going to a class in yoga where the teacher said that, spirituality speaking, if you believed that you had achieved enlightenment you have merely arrived at your limitation. I think that is also true in a practical sense. Deeply held beliefs of any kind prevent you from being open to experience, which is why I find all firmly held ideological positions questionable. It makes me nervous when someone believes too deeply or too much. I think that being sceptical and questioning all deeply held beliefs is essential. Of course we must know the difference between scepticism and cynicism because cynicism is as much a restriction of one’s openness to the world as passionate belief is. They are sort of twins. And then in a very real way, solving any problem is more important than being right. There is a significant sense of self-righteousness in both the art and design world. Perhaps it begins at school. Art school often begins with the Ayn Rand model of the single personality resisting the ideas of the surrounding culture. The theory of the avant garde is that as an individual you can transform the world, which is true up to a point. One of the signs of a damaged ego is absolute certainty.
Schools encourage the idea of not compromising and defending your work at all costs. Well, the issue at work is usually all about the nature of compromise. You just have to know what to compromise. Blind pursuit of your own ends which excludes the possibility that others may be right does not allow for the fact that in design we are always dealing with a triad – the client, the audience and you.
Ideally, making everyone win through acts of accommodation is desirable. But self-righteousness is often the enemy. Self-righteousness and narcissism generally come out of some sort of childhood trauma, which we do not have to go into. It is a consistently difficult thing in human affairs. Some years ago I read a most remarkable thing about love, that also applies to the nature of co-existing with others. It was a quotation from Iris Murdoch in her obituary. It read ‘ Love is the extremely difficult realisation that something other than oneself is real.’ Isn’t that fantastic! The best insight on the subject of love that one can imagine.

9
ON AGING.
Last year someone gave me a charming book by Roger Rosenblatt called ‘Ageing Gracefully’ I got it on my birthday. I did not appreciate the title at the time but it contains a series of rules for ageing gracefully. The first rule is the best. Rule number one is that ‘it doesn’t matter.’ ‘It doesn’t matter that what you think. Follow this rule and it will add decades to your life. It does not matter if you are late or early, if you are here or there, if you said it or didn’t say it, if you are clever or if you were stupid. If you were having a bad hair day or a no hair day or if your boss looks at you cockeyed or your boyfriend or girlfriend looks at you cockeyed, if you are cockeyed. If you don’t get that promotion or prize or house or if you do – it doesn’t matter.’ Wisdom at last. Then I heard a marvellous joke that seemed related to rule number 10. A butcher was opening his market one morning and as he did a rabbit popped his head through the door. The butcher was surprised when the rabbit inquired ‘Got any cabbage?’ The butcher said ‘This is a meat market – we sell meat, not vegetables.’ The rabbit hopped off. The next day the butcher is opening the shop and sure enough the rabbit pops his head round and says ‘You got any cabbage?’ The butcher now irritated says ‘Listen you little rodent I told you yesterday we sell meat, we do not sell vegetables and the next time you come here I am going to grab you by the throat and nail those floppy ears to the floor.’ The rabbit disappeared hastily and nothing happened for a week. Then one morning the rabbit popped his head around the corner and said ‘Got any nails?’ The butcher said ‘No.’ The rabbit said ‘Ok. Got any cabbage?’

10
TELL THE TRUTH.
The rabbit joke is relevant because it occurred to me that looking for a cabbage in a butcher’s shop might be like looking for ethics in the design field. It may not be the most obvious place to find either. It’s interesting to observe that in the new AIGA’s code of ethics there is a significant amount of useful information about appropriate behaviour towards clients and other designers, but not a word about a designer’s relationship to the public. We expect a butcher to sell us eatable meat and that he doesn’t misrepresent his wares. I remember reading that during the Stalin years in Russia that everything labelled veal was actually chicken. I can’t imagine what everything labelled chicken was. We can accept certain kinds of misrepresentation, such as fudging about the amount of fat in his hamburger but once a butcher knowingly sells us spoiled meat we go elsewhere. As a designer, do we have less responsibility to our public than a butcher? Everyone interested in licensing our field might note that the reason licensing has been invented is to protect the public not designers or clients. ‘Do no harm’ is an admonition to doctors concerning their relationship to their patients, not to their fellow practitioners or the drug companies. If we were licensed, telling the truth might become more central to what we do.

via Milton Glaser inc.

UTOPIA

2008-09-22T23:22:00.004+03:00

by Brendan Perry

I feel greater then the sum of all my parts
A domestic beast with a hairy Heart
Trapped within a walled suburbia

I found my tastes is somewhat underground
Between the shadows and the cracks
I’m building my Utopia

I need to beak free from all that binds
That makes me old before my time
In this world of Dystopia
My love is lik a a bright, guiding light
Shining in the darkness of the night
The star of my Utopia

In the motion of the sea, in the air that we breath
Can you feel me?
In the stars and in the trees, in the song of the bees
Can you hear me?

Caged, golden memories
Time has come to show your true feelings
I know it’s the only way to be
When the same old feelings come over me

I feel greater of all the sum of all my parts
A space jockey from a distant star
marooned upon Dystopia
I found my tastes is somewhat underground
Between the shadows and the cracks
I’m building my Utopia

In the motion of the sea, in the air that we breath
Can you feel me?
In the stars and in the trees, in the song of the bees
Can you hear me?

The man's got a point

2008-09-18T17:21:00.003+03:00

"THE HISTORY OF ART IS SIMPLY A HISTORY OF GETTING RID OF THE UGLY BY ENTERING INTO IT, AND USING IT. AFTER ALL THE NOTION OF SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF US BEING UGLY IS NOT OUTSIDE OF US BUT INSIDE OF US. AND THAT'S WHY I KEEP REITERATING THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH OUR MINDS. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS TO GET THEM OPEN SO THAT WE DO NOT SEE THINGS AS BEING UGLY OR BEAUTIFUL BUT WE SEE THEM JUST AS THEY ARE."

John Cage

( actually this man has got four points and a comma )

Oh bother where art thou... ?

2008-09-16T16:21:00.006+03:00

" Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original, whereas if you simply try to tell the truth ( without caring twopence how often it has been told before ) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without even having noticed it. "

- C.S. Lewis

Statement!

2008-09-15T17:22:00.005+03:00

I would rather want to know everybody's questions than to know their answers.

The Baader Meinhof Phenomenon

2008-09-09T16:03:00.004+03:00

You may have heard about Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon before. In fact, you probably learned about it for the first time very recently. If not, then you just might hear about it again very soon. Baader-Meinhof is the phenomenon where one happens upon some obscure piece of information– often an unfamiliar word or name– and soon afterwards encounters the same subject again, often repeatedly. Anytime the phrase "That's so weird, I just heard about that the other day" would be appropriate, the utterer is hip-deep in Baader-Meinhof.

Most people seem to have experienced the phenomenon at least a few times in their lives, and many people encounter it with such regularity that they anticipate it upon the introduction of new information. But what is the underlying cause? Is there some hidden meaning behind Baader-Meinhof events?

The phenomenon bears some similarity to synchronicity, which is the experience of having a highly meaningful coincidence… such as having someone telephone you while you are thinking about them. Both phenomena invoke a feeling of mild surprise, and cause one to ponder the odds of such an intersection. Both smack of destiny, as though the events were supposed to occur in just that arrangement… as though we're witnessing yet another domino tip over in a chain of dominoes beyond our reckoning.

Despite science's cries that a world as complex as ours invites frequent coincidences, observation tells us that such an explanation is inadequate. Observation shows us that Baader-Meinhof strikes with blurring accuracy, and too frequently to be explained away so easily. But over the centuries, observation has also shown us that observation itself is highly flawed, and not to be trusted.

The reason for this is our brains' prejudice towards patterns. Our brains are fantastic pattern recognition engines, a characteristic which is highly useful for learning, but it does cause the brain to lend excessive importance to unremarkable events. Considering how many words, names, and ideas a person is exposed to in any given day, it is unsurprising that we sometimes encounter the same information again within a short time. When that occasional intersection occurs, the brain promotes the information because the two instances make up the beginnings of a sequence. What we fail to notice is the hundreds or thousands of pieces of information which aren't repeated, because they do not conform to an interesting pattern. This tendency to ignore the "uninteresting" data is an example of selective attention.

In point of fact, coincidences themselves are usually just an artifact of perception. We humans tend to underestimate the probability of coinciding events, so our expectations are at odds with reality. And non-coincidental events do not grab our attention with anywhere near the same intensity, because coincidences are patterns, and the brain actually stimulates us for successfully detecting patterns… hence their inflated value. In short, patterns are habit-forming.

But when we hear a word or name which we just learned the previous day, it often feels like more than a mere coincidence. This is because Baader-Meinhof is amplified by the recency effect, a cognitive bias that inflates the importance of recent stimuli or observations. This increases the chances of being more aware of the subject when we encounter it again in the near future.

How the phenomenon came to be known as "Baader-Meinhof" is uncertain. It seems likely that some individual learned of the existence of the historic German urban guerrilla group which went by that name, and then heard the name again soon afterwards. This plucky wordsmith may then have named the phenomenon after the very subject which triggered it. But it is certainly a mouthful; a shorter name might have more hope of penetrating the lexicon.

However it came to be known by such a name, it is clear that Baader-Meinhof is yet another charming fantasy whose magic is diluted by stick-in-the-mud science and its sinister cohort: facts. But if you've never heard of the phenomenon before, be sure to watch for it in the next few days… brain stimulation is nice.

Via Damn Interresting

Also see the Serial Position effect

About us

2008-09-04T15:29:00.005+03:00

We will always marvel at the things resulted from infinite patience.

Form follows idea ...

2008-09-03T21:11:00.004+03:00

" If only we could get all our systems in place... then everything will work and everything will be fine. Time spent managing the process has overtaken the creative activity of actually generating something.

Filing is now more important than forming. This is turn reflects a culture that lacks autonomous self-confidence and willingness to trust in risk. ' A culture increasingly defined by rule serving and form filling accountancy rather than rule questioning.'

Organizing is a preparatory and retrospective process not a generative one.

It is useful when consolidating that which, in general, has already been proved to work, but it does not function well as a device for the generation of new ideas."

by Maxine Naylor & Ralph Bell

Domnul Abramovici

2008-08-28T16:08:00.002+03:00

Dimineata,in drum spre serviciu, un evreu vede in statia de tramvai, un domn bine facut si foarte bine imbracat. Prezenta lui il intriga. Un domn astfel imbracat nu se duce la serviciu la aceasta ora a diminetii; daca nu se duce, inseamna ca vine; de unde poate veni in zori de zi un domn astfel imbracat dect de la o dama; un domn bine vine de la o dama bine; la noi in cartier sunt trei dame bine: Natasa, care-i insa plecata la Leningrad, Rashela, dar de la ea vin chiar eu, si sotia mea. Sotia mea are trei amanti: directorul ei (firesc), directorul meu (normal), si pe un oarecare domn Abramovici.

- Buna dimineata, domnule Abramovici!
- Buna dimineata. Dar de unde ma cunoasteti?
- Simpla deductie......

de architectura...

2008-08-28T14:53:00.004+03:00

Arhitectura " ...se naste din practica si din teorie" [ex fabrica et ratiocinatione]; "cei ce s-au increzut numai in calcule si scrieri , par a fi urmarit o umbra, nu un lucru. Dar cei care le-au adancit pe amandoua, ca inzestrati cu toate armele, au atins [...] ceea ce si-au propus."

Vitruvius - cartea I - 1,1,1; 4-5

" emaque esse proprietatem diuitiarium maxime nihil desiderare. "

Vitruvius

ambele citate fac parte din introducerea scrisa de Traian Costa ( prefata editiei 1964 ) - Traducere - G.M. Cantacuzino

Cineva spunea ...

2008-08-26T13:24:00.006+03:00

"...Crezi ca nu-mi face bine sa gandesc prea mult?"

Interlocutorul i-a raspuns :

"Eu nu sunt de parere ca ti-ar face rau sa gandesti. Mai sunt de parere ca nu exista termenul de ‘ prea mult ‘. Exista doar un singur factor care decide cat este prea mult si cat este prea putin – acel factor il cunosti foarte bine si l-ai amintit in scrierea ta … acel factor esti tu. Singura problema apare cand impartasesti anumite lucruri cu cineva care te va eticheta in functie de sistemul lor de referinta – iar frica sa nu sochezi acea persoana sau acea masa de personae tot tie ( fauritorului acelui gand sau idee ) iti apartine. Frica si respectiv noi insine suntem inamicii nostri cei mai mari.

Eu spun – da-I bataie – si macina ce ai acolo, dezvolta – si impartaseste….

Imi vine in minte o chestie ce i-a zis-o X lui Y acum ceva vreme: “Stiu tot ce spun dar nu spun tot ce stiu.” – mie mi s-a parut foarte buna dar in acelasi timp si foarte rea – asadar interpretantul acestei zicale este arhitectul / fauritorul destinului propriu si o foloseste cu si dupa rationamentul lui momentan.

Suntem oameni – Suntem stapanii propriului nostru univers – Suntem constienti de existenta altor oameni( respectiv infinitele universuri ce ne inconjoara si cu care interactionam inevitabil) – Suntem creatori - Suntem capabili de orice –Suntem copii si suntem fericiti..."

....

"...Am sters deja 2 inceputuri de scrisoare pe care vroiam sa ti le scriu. Cu sinceritate nu stiu cum sa iti raspund la ceea ce mi-ai scris – stiu doar ca imi doresc sa iti raspund… faptul ca nu imi gasesc cuvintele necesare este o alta treaba ( limitata doar de grai si limbaj – insasi o limitare de-facto a ceea ce numim noi oameni ). De miscat – sunt miscat si voi continua sa iti comunic prin alt Mediu ceea ce simt…

Pot doar sa merg inainte cu capul sus si cu bratele deschise sa intampin cu taria unui Copac de fier si cu fluiditatea unei salcii ceea ce va urma. Un numitor comun au ambele exemple … radacina.

Doresc sa iti multumesc pentru aceasta radacina puternica… ea va ramane pe veci in adancurile mele si de ea ma voi agata la vremuri … evitabile si inevitabile. "

The secret of happiness

2008-08-24T14:43:00.004+03:00

" The difference between happiness and misery is 1 Pound...

... If you earn 100 Pounds and spend 99 --> happiness.
If you earn 100 Pounds and spend 101 --> misery."

Charles Dickens ( Celebrated English writer )

It could be 10 cents, 1 second, 1 breath, 1 year, 1 book ... think about it.

Lumi(ni)le de la capatul Tunelulu..."O" - ferimituri

2008-08-14T20:03:00.004+03:00

"...dintr-o alta regiune a fiintei fac parte Lumile Posibile. In orizontul ambiguu al fiintei or fi putut sa se desfasoare altfel, si nimic nu exclude ca ar putea fi acolo o lume in care nu sunt astfel de granite intre specii, in care granitele sa fie altele sau de-a dreptul sa nu existe - o lume adica, unde sa nu existe genuri naturale, si unde incrucisarea unei camile cu o locomotiva sa poata sa nasca o radacina patrata. Cu toate acestea, daca eu ma pot gandi si la o lume posibila in care sa fie valabile numai geometrii ne- euclidiene, unicul meu mod pe care-l am de a gandi o geometrie ne-euclidiana este sa-i fixez regulile, si deci limitele. "

U. Eco - Kant si Ornitorincul ( Pontica 2002 )

-------------------------------------

" Pentru magistrul care poseda un atat de fin simt artistic al secretelor expresiei si un treaz simtamant de educator in cunoasterea caracterelor, existau de multa vreme anumite caracteristici fizionomice pe care se bizuia instinctiv, fara a-si fi construit din ele un sistem; asa, de exemplu, pentru el exista un fel specific castalian si unul specific lumesc de ras, de zambet si voiosie, ca si un fel specific lumesc de suferinta si tristete. "

- Text extras din 'Jocul cu margele de sticla' ( Hermann Hesse ), descriind abilitatea fantastica al lui Magister Ludi de a cunoaste si re-cunoaste diferitele caractere pe care le intampina zi de zi.

-------------------------------------

" - Un labirint al simbolurilor, m-a corectat acesta. Un invizibil labirint al timpului. Mie, englez salbatic, mi-a fost dat sa dovedesc aceasta taina fragila. La capatul a mai bine de o suta de ani, amanuntele sunt irecuperabile, dar nu-i greu sa presupun ce s-a intamplat. Ts' ui Pen ar fi spus odata: Ma retrag pentru a scrie o carte. Si alta data: Ma retrag pentru a construi un labirint.Toti si-au inchipuit doua lucruri; nimeni nu s-a gandit ca labirintulsi cartea erau un singur obiect. Pavilionul Purei Singuratati se inalta in mijlocul unei gradini de nepatruns; faptul acesta poate sa le fi sugerat oamenilor un labirint fizic. Ts' ui Pen a murit; nimeni, pe dilatatele pamanturi care-au fost ale sale, nu a gasit labirintul; confuzia romanului mi-a sugerat ideea ca acesta ar fi labirintul. Doua imprejurari m-au facut sa ajung, direct, la aceasta solutie. Una: ciudata legenda ca Ts' ui Pensi-a propus un labirint care sa fie absolut nesfarsit. Alta: un fragment dintr-o scrisoare pe care am descoperit-o.

Albert s-a ridicat. Pentru cateva clipe, mi-a intors spatele; a deschis un sertar al biroului aurit si innegrit de timp. S-a intors cu o hartie care avusese candva culoarea purpurei; acum era rosietica, subtire si patrata. Renumele de caligraf al lui Ts' ui Pen era indreptatit. Am citit cu nedumerire si fervoare cuvintele urmatoare, pe care cineva din sangele meu le-a transcris cu o pensula, minutios: Las mai multor viitoruri ( nu tuturor ) gradina mea cu poteci care se bifurca...."

Jorge Luis Borges - Gradina potecilor ce se bifurca - Fictiuni 1944 ( editura univers 1999 )

------------------------------------

"CARIATA :

-adica ciuruita si friabila, sau chiar rizomatica, un Nod de serpuiri ce se pot reparcurge potrivit unor optiuni diverse la infinit, ca un labirint "

Gianni Vattimo - ... despre fiinta ...

"O"

The I inside

2008-08-07T23:36:00.008+03:00

Forever and always people were questioning what changes and what is remaining over time. (Almost)None of them have drawn the conclusion regarding this matter, and thankfully - that is the first big(and important) step, because you cannot draw a conclusion, not in paint, moving image nor in words. These are all limited expression mediums (they are just expression mediums) . Even talking about this here feels like I'm drawing the portrait of God by adding meaning to a line i drew on a white surface. It's self-inflicting to think so but it's also self-indulgent if you don't think at all. If you think in words the limit appears already in our minds. If we are limiting ourselves by nature and change over time - we are then defined only by the white space we leave between the words we speak and think, and the pauses in our actions. But as a friend of mine said a while ago... Life is although.