TECH NOT LOGY

We’re no longer in the drama of alienation but in the ecstasy of communication (Jean Baudrillard, 1983).

Amsterdam / Gendringen 12/2022Over the past 20 years, we studied, tinkered and prototyped what turns out to become the two most frantic domains and concepts in today's society: identity and social network technology. And to make it even more unlikely – what it what we foresee? – the two intertwined, merged and energised all public and private domains. More in detail: the creation, the appropriation and later the hostage taking of human identity by technology, and digital network technology that appropriated the social and turned it into a technical infrastructure as Standing Reserve, as Heidegger sees this, at the essence of modern technology.Identity
Identity, as human singularity, has always been an apriori in philosophy and in the social sciences, a pre-existing reality, not something real and tangible. Social mass media technology has turned identity into a feature of high informational energy/value. Technology coagulated identity in a something. The concept of identity has been 'energised' by technology, turns it from one state of energy into another, by dividing and capitalising its potential differences.Social technology
The social body, where public values rule against private domination, vanished after the global neoliberal takeover in the 80's. In this void, technology remediated a social relational structure, privately dominated, as technology did with all public domains, from finance and business to leisure and mass media. The success of these remediations is astounding but the dominance of social technology is not due to the instrumentalisation or mediation of something that already existed, technology as a means, but social technology is the technical simulation of a 'social' that is 'better' and more vital than social has ever been. And that doesn't exist anymore. This social simulation is better in storing its energy, potential information, and makes it exploitable at any time. And distribute it where ever its potential value is needed, as in a warehouse. Pessimistic? Not as we see what damage it does.First, the earth has been exploited as Standing Reserve for its natural resources, later industries transformed stored energy into different stored energy, and bureaucracies turned people into Standing Reserve as Human Resources, HR. In recent decades, the social, as a viable network of potential relations, and the human mind, where meaning and subjectivity is processed, has turned into Standing Reserve as well. The energy of our feelings, anxieties, moods and opinions, informational values, became part of a new Standing Reserve, to accelerate the circulation of data and stored in memory for influencing future transactions. Most recently, our ideas, imaginations and creativity have been added to Standing Reserve, as data in commercial artificial intelligence. Pessimistic? We think not!Finally, art, long thought of as an oasis, free from the technological mentality, now is prepared to fit in the ordering, as part of the simulation that technology has propagated. The role art once played in the social and in the proliferation of agency and freedom of the human mind has been finally absorbed too as products of cultural politics, of ordering and regulating and directing dominant ideology.After the capture of the social and of human identity and ideas, and art as the praxis of becoming vanished along the way, how can we think, relate and connect to stand against the force of Standing Reserve? There is one concept that cannot be captured by the technological mentality, and not by late-capitalism, that can enrich human life and learn to offend technology as dominant force: individuation. This concept is developed by the French philosopher Gilbert Simondon around 1954. Simondon is famous as his thinking inspired great thinkers as Deleuze, Stiegler, Latour and Stengers. He based ‘Individuation’ on his finding that individuality is not something that comes from nothing, and cannot be technically assembled; there must be another principle how the individual comes into being that aligns with knowledge from other sciences, from evolutionary biology and from quantum theory.All living beings, all objects and our psyche and collectivity are 'individuated,' they bring ‘themselves’ continuously into being in the process of becoming. For most of us life in general feels rich, diverse, dynamic, and surprising, always in change and adapting; human life in modern times, though, becomes less and less diverse and vivid and more structured, regulated and guided by a technological force we are subjected to. Identity, as an example, is for young people something to work on, invest in, compete with, improve and identity is their ‘endpoint’, the goal, what is to be achieved. But again, identity is a construction that has no basics in social sciences, it is an apriori. To put it differently: identity is made by technology into a product where energy is stored for future exploitation. The culture wars , part of the same process, are grounded in the allocation of this potential energy and is a war on time, who owns the future? Social mass media technology platforms these wars. Identity is the symbolic subject of this wars. To change identity from a technological product, and to learn to understand how identity and individuation are related, being vs. becoming, can help people to pull themselves back from these wars.We choose ‘individuation’ as the subject of our next project. Individuation is the continuous process wherein 'being' is just a stage, and this dynamism and unpredictability confronts the technological mentality, which appropriates identity and social as potential energy, with something insimulational and which cannot be copied.Individuation is not technological, thus technotlogy.com. A project that hides in plain sight what at the same time is revealed.TECH NOT LOGY is part of Boolean Works together with Gemeente Nieuwe IJssel, S.O.O.O.S, ANDSTERDAM, Per~soon, DENKMAL, The Three Sisters, and other artistic-political projects.*

Beyond theory
Why has Europe, like Asia, India, and Africa, surrendered to the dominance of US digital technology that destroys human agency, the richness and variety of ideas, and destroys and appropriates the social fabric? After the US's first invasion of TV and advertising after WWII, which turned citizens into consumers, the EU and its founding governments did nothing to protect their citizens or the social and cultural structures against the aggression of US-based technology founded by libertarians. EU citizens and social structures continue to be bombarded by US technology. No anti-missiles or Iron Dome for Europe.Contemporary art has marginalised itself by turning into a capitalist instrument of homogenisation, supportive to the status quo and the dominant ideology. In todays art industry the uniqueness of the human mind (of the artist), as a great source of variation, has turned into the financialisation of scarcity, of the exception, rather than accumulate into an artistic-political movement, alike Guy DeBord or Joseph Beuys, to generally increase human agency, freed from social pressure and conformism, and to inspire individual and collective action for variety, against sameness.Short resumé
Soft Technology EU is part of a larger artistic-political initiative that includes GEMEENTE NIEUWE IJSSEL, SOOOS, ANDSTERDAM, DENKMAL, PER~SON and DE DRIE ZUSTERS. All projects focus on the richness, variety and coherence between the human mind, the social and the environment. Social Mass Media technology contributes to the further breakdown of this cohesion and to the decrease of diversity in all realms of life. Art as a critical practice has been appropriated by capitalism and art operates as its instrument of being, to prevent the rise of becoming, of freeing minds from addictions to communication. These capitalist practices produce homogenisation, prevent oppositions and kills future diversity.

In 1973, the artist Richard Serra (yes, the sculptor) shed light on the structure of mass media in 'Television delivers people', produced by Carlota Fay Schoolman.

SMMT

Social media technology and television are mass media that maintain the status quo, control the uniformity of social groups and collectives, and homogenise human minds and ideas. Recently television merged with advanced social technology into 'Social Mass Media Technology'. This new technology combines advertising, news, user data, celebrity culture, VR, and fuses identity politics and business ownership.

The NATURES OF TECHNOLOGY

We distinct hard from soft technology. Soft technology is the human activity, mental and physical, that adds value, variety, surprise, and diversity to all beings on this planet. In contrast, hard technology suffers from what philosopher Martin Heidegger calls "Gestell" (1953). According to Heidegger, the essence of modern technology is not the technical aspects of tools and machines, but rather the way in which they shape and are shaped by human understanding and behaviour. Gestell, or the "enframing," is the way in which technology organises and structures human experience, providing a framework within which we encounter the world and interact with it. This framework is characterised by a focus on efficiency and control, with an emphasis on calculating and manipulating the world in order to extract maximum value and benefit.After World War II, a new kind of technology emerged, cybernetics and digital technology, that seemed closer related to the human mind and relations than machines, day-mining or windmills, but lacks any reference to the lived experience. At first digital technologies did not harm human processes. Eventually, digital technology became subject to Gestell as well, as it integrated with bureaucracy, mass media, social technology, accelerated by adding artificial information processes and merged with the structure of ownership of these technologies. This new US technology has a devastating limiting impact on the becoming individual, which is further atomised with decreasing human agency that in itself lead to the rise of identity, and infects and homogenises social processes.Current global crises, though, require people to step up and guide society out of its predicament. Social Mass Media Technology, which claimed to be open and connective, has paralysed society just when we need agency the most. Soft Technology EU aims, supported by our own experience in art, social theory and various analog and digital technologies to vitalise technology by disconnecting it from Gestell.

Why THE EU?

Social media and other forms of mass media, such as television and deep news, have a devastating impact on the formation and exchange of information and ideas in the EU and beyond. Many of the platforms and technologies that fuels the circulation of informational value originate from the US and have been exported worldwide. As a result, the US has spread its culture and divisive energy over the world. The atomisation of the individual and the breakdown of the social accelerated by the proliferation of this ideology.As the power structure of the world evolves from bipolarity to multipolar hegemonies, and Europe's influence is growing, it is time to set ethical and social standards for how technology shapes the future of human life rather than distort it.Under pressure from climate change, food health, sustainability or privacy policy, the European Union has set their own standards, more stringent and powerful than others. These standards apply to both exported and imported products and services in the EU. At first glance, defining standards limit trade and flexibility of Europe in the global market. Diversifying supply chains to different standards, limits the effectiveness and profitability of current production and complicates future innovation. However, there are clear signs that after the establishment of new standards by Europe, these standards act as reference for new global standards. Why? It is cheaper to comply with EU regulations, a huge market, even when operating in non-EU markets. Soft Technology EU is benefiting from this development in the spreading of its own concepts. Now is the time to start EU technology standards and the debacle of US tech is guiding this process by its excesses and perversions.It is time to define new standards for the psychological and social information structure in the EU and, as with CO2 regulation through the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), to re-establish the standards within Europe and ultimately raise them to global standards.New standards for Social Mass Media Technology must not only take into account the known problems, but must also rebuild the core of the different concepts, as US-dominated profit- and business models grounds the architecture and various flows. This includes cultural preferences like the American celebrity and credit culture. The understanding of the individual (in opposition to the consumer) and of society (opposing to markets), viewed through a profit lens or from the perspective of 'survival of the fittest' or the 'American dream,' do not (yet) match the perceived life of 'EU citizens' and how social mass technology affects each personal, social and world view. The flooding of US social mass media technology cannot be overestimated, but EU mass media, social technology and moguls like Murdoch, Berlusconi or de Mol are no less dangerous.

WHY NOW?

There is a need for a new human agency to address the challenges we're facing: climate change, social and economic inequality, threats to democracy and autocracy, and the technology dystopia that we have allowed to emerge. The human agency that is needed to meet these challenges has been effectively diverted to sustain social entertainment and consumption, which has contributed to social conflict and the depletion of natural resources. This has come at the expense of the vitality of the human mind and ideas, the vitality and variety of the social community, and the diversity of the natural environment, all for the benefit of a few individuals and corporations and to preserve the hegemony of the US over the rest of the world.The complex of mass media, social technology, and its private ownership has become one of the biggest obstacles against the growth of human agency.Almost all social mass media technology comes from the United States and represents the second wave of mass media after advertising and television following World War II. Now the EU is the outlet for this, all initiative comes from the US. And see what consequences this has in the US itself, it has broken up society. To make a new start to free humanity from this yoke, enabling human agency to increase and be available for collective challenges, we started Soft Technology EU.The EU must technologically emancipate itself from the hyper-capitalist version that the US offers the world. Many things need to change for this, including a more basic understanding of the nature of technology, enabling human capacities to be available for human and life-worthy purposes.To achieve this change, we need to shift our focus away from technology as a means for communication, entertainment and consumption, and towards technology as an attitude for mental, social and environmental revitalisation. This requires a new approach to technology development and deployment, one that values permeability, oppositions, dilemmas and trilemmas, heterogeneity and surprise.Finally, we must prioritise the ethical and moral implications of technology. We cannot allow technology to continue to be used to exploit people and resources for the benefit of a few at the expense of the many. Instead, we must ensure that technology serves the needs and values of all members of society and respects the rights and dignity of all living beings.By taking these steps, we can reclaim technology as the human capacity to build a more just, surprising and sustainable world. This is the vision of Soft Technology EU, and we invite you to join us in this important work.

Richness and variety

The coherence between the mind (the world of rich ideas and inner imaginations), society (the exchange of communality and solidarity), and the milieu (the connected Umwelten of all organisms) has shrunk under late capitalism. Richness and diversity suffer from sameness and homogeneity. But future diversity depends on the richness we create today. Social Mass Media Technology contributes to the decline of agency, to the increase of conflict and the breakdown of the epistemological framework for our understanding of the world and humanity's place within it. As Félix Guattari wrote in 1989: "Human subjectivity, in all its uniqueness, is as endangered as those rare species that are disappearing from the planet every day. It is up to us to resist this mass-media homogenisation, which is both desingularising and infantalising".

We offer our first concise ideas on rewriting the standards of Social Mass Media Tech in the EU. But first we introduce our attempt against homogenisation and to increase mental and social diversity: Fazzination (2012-2019).

FAZZINATION 2012-2019

Fazzination is about knowledge, ideas and ideation, both personal and professional, in and between personal and SAAS networks.
As artists, we founded Fazzination in 2012 and built an ecology-of-mind-as-network, in response to the rise of social media; as a counter narrative to it. Our main concern at the time was the potential impact of social media on the mind and the social well-being of society, and to go against the sameness it produces. Sameness is a characteristic of capitalism, and today's technology is its accelerator. 20 political parties in Dutch Congress, 20 candystores in one street in Amsterdam, 20 different flavours of peanut butter in the supermarket, 200 TV channels. Social technology homogenises imaginative and social energy and exploits the human imagination. Therefore, we designed Fazzination around personal and professional fascinations: the platform is safe by design, with a focus on an architecture of permeability and avoiding social acceleration. In terms of business model, Fazzination is without ads or data transfers, and the user is not exploited in any way. How? We merged a free network with SAAS clouds, with the user as the single point of control in and beween both types of networks. This network diversification gave the user maximum control, which turned out to be not always appreciated.We introduced many Dutch cultural and knowledge organisations during the early years of Fazzination. What was their view on de US dominated technology; does it comply with European ethics and social standards? We thought not. VPRO, NRC, Openbare Bibliotheken, OBA, diverse Hogescholen, NPO, Kennisnet, TNO, EYE were among them and we worked with thousands of users, local communities and partners in Fazzination like Gemeente Utrecht, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Avans University.What we didn't know then and what we know now is that you cannot build tech that does not correspond with how people see themselves , and what they expect from a platform like Fazzination. Fazzination is about tinkering, surprise and avoids social acceleration. The concepts of individuality, community, knowledge and communication, though, are concluded after years of US tech domination and become narrower over time.Below the Fazzination architecture from 2012 presented to the specialists in The Netherlands. "Why do we need another social network when Facebook does such a great job?" responded digital experts in the Creative Industry.

In 2019, after Fazzination, we went back to the real world to further work on the variety and coherence between the human mind, the social and the milieu, which we name The three ecologies after Félix Guattari. With Soft Technology EU, as part of this enterprise, we develop and share ideas about the future of technology and mass media.

Art has always been thought of as something different and distinct from technology, as a domain of human expression and creativity that exists outside of the practical and utilitarian concerns of the technological world. However, it is worth considering the idea that art and art making itself is technological - a "soft" technology, as opposed to the "hard" technology of machines and systems that dominate our modern world. Even in contemporary art, where posthuman theory is mainstream, the act of making art is ultimately a unique solistic human activity, almost nostalgic, one that requires the creative and expressive abilities of the human mind. Art is not thought of as technological. Art and the art market celebrates the individual artist and the mythical artwork. Joseph Beuys, the German pan-ecological artist, therefore developed the 'Erweiterte Kunstbegriff', the extended art concept, to oppose all fixations that limits the power of art for societal and individual change. Art as Technology is our proposal to extend art, in order to liberate art, as the most fundamental human capacity, for designing a future world.Technê is Greek for art, craft and technique and shows that the essence of art is technological. In many fields within the humanities, there is criticism of human centrism, but not in art itself. Yes, there is digital art, but digital art is only technologically produced, reproduced or distributed. There is a common understanding that technology and art as human expression are separated, almost desperately, but technology doesn't support but is the support, the scaffolding of human intentionality of the body and the mind. Our aim in pointing out this presumed separation, is questioning the basic understanding of how technology, the human body, the mind that emerged from this body and our shared understanding of the world are intertwined. We believe that, to overcome the domination of the marriage between technology, state and capitalism, and to free art from the same ideology, we better reappropriate (a new understanding and version of) technology as a supportive concept. And thus freeing ourselves through art.The concept of Gestell, as described by Heidegger in his book "On the Question of Technology" (1953), refers to the mechanism of hard technology that seeks to dominate and exploit the world around us through the use of extensions, tools, machines, and systems. This kind of technology is driven by the desire to control and regulate the world at the expense of human labor, natural resources, and diversity in both biological and cultural systems. In the final chapter of the book, Heidegger argued that art, when not absorbed by capitalism, is the only possible attitude to stand up against Gestell. He supported this idea by arguing that art can provide a way to resist the domination and exploitation inherent in hard technology and instead foster a more holistic and respectful relationship with the world. However, many who refer to Gestell do not mention this unique quality of art, perhaps because they are obsessed by the negative impacts of technology on society.In contrast with hard technology, which seeks to dominate and control the world through the use of extensions, tools, machines, and systems, art as technology represents a life-centered understanding of technology. Rather than trying to bend the world to our will, art as technology seeks to understand and work with the world, expanding the richness of possible relations and exploring new ways of thinking and ideating. This approach allows for a more holistic and nuanced approach to exploring life on this planet and problem-solving, rather than simply trying to control and exploit the world. The idea that "ART IS LIFE" reflects this approach and corresponds with the ideas of artist Joseph Beuys, who shared this belief. Through this lens, we can see that art and life are interconnected and that art can provide a way to foster a more respectful and collaborative relationship with the world.In Biosemiotics a distinction is made between two different kinds of code. The Danish biochemist Jesper Hoffmeyer developed the concept of code-duality. Code-duality is related to the topological puzzle of how DNA must be understood in the communicative relation between the organism and its environment. DNA alone is not sufficient to translate the signs from the environment into valuable information for the organism to update itself (and finally its DNA). An analog code version is needed to carry and hold the relational information between organism and environment. Digital code (DNA) and analog code are in a kind of Möbius relation between organism and environment. Gestell and Art are in a similar inverted relation to each other.Art, when not surrendered to capitalism, is technology. It operates and communicates between the individual and their environment in a way that is holistic, expressive and expansive, allowing us to explore new perspectives and ideas that arise out of this interplay. Through art as technology, we expand our understanding of the world and our place in it, drawing non-binary ways to relate to and interact with our surroundings.As each concept or ideology is perfectly reflected in its counterpart or mirror – carries it unnoticed on the back while being fed with vital fluids – technology as art contrasts and reveals the backside, the opposite, the negation of Gestell.Heidegger remarked in his 1953 article, art would probably be absorbed by Gestell too. He had seen the first signs of this...(!)

Notions on Soft Techology in the EU.

1.
Private
The term "private," as in private property, comes from the Latin word "privare," which means "to rob, steal." Private refers to something that has been taken from the public domain.But what do private and public mean under late capitalism since there are no secrets anymore and everything is on public display? Reality TV and Social Media reverted the meaning of stealing (of private) and turned it into entertainment. Today everything is public except equity or the ownership of tech and media companies.The EU GDPR regulation focusses on digital privacy. We have always argued privacy is important but far less than the general impact from Social Mass Media Technology on the vitality of the human mind and the resilience of the social body. After GDPR Soft Technology EU standards are necessary.2.
Individualisation, really?
It is widely accepted that the decrease in mental health is the result of the increasing individualisation of society. In the case of social mass media technology this causality is questionable and ambiguous.The human mind is fundamentally embodied and located in time and space. Technology, by compressing time and space, leaves individuals in an unstable void. Information as space, and news as time, are the equivalents of these compressed, accelerated and shifted dimensions.The architecture and algorithms of social mass media technology claim to enable and optimise personal expression in a safe environment. Expression in a safe environment are the two crucial components for a child to develop a balanced and healthy identity. Social mass media has broken the balance, of this equilibrium, to contribute to the illusion of safety of the social at the expense of the richness of human expression and experiment. Expression in social technology is not meant to create safe / brave spaces for personal expression; these attempts at "becoming" are an intricate part of a social formation based on "being." The transactional communication that target individual users is not aimed at seducing individual minds, but at enclosing them within a sphere of social desire.In social technology human desires are reflected and reinforced through social illusions. Just when i thought i was out, they pulled me back in. Individualisation is misunderstood; it is the social apparatus that individuals should avoid and protect themselves from. The idea of social communities as a safe haven and an ideal is the greatest trick of capitalism and the biggest claim of social mass media technology. Not the individual desires are processed but through them the social bodies are fed and weaponised, in this indirect and roundabout way, to control the individual.This has consequences: in these times of multiple crises and a lack of social resistance, which is blocked and absorbed by social comfort, we depend on the independent minds of individuals like Zelensky, Greta Thunberg, and others to lead us out of our predicament. Social and social technology does not help:"For those of us on the spectrum almost everything is black or white. We aren't very good at lying and we usually don't enjoy participating in the social game as the rest of you seem so fond of. I think in many ways we autistic are the normal ones and the rest of the people are pretty strange—especially when it comes to the sustainability crisis." (Greta Thunberg)3.
SMMT
Social Mass Media technology emerged around 2005 – after TV in the 50's – and later merged with news, entertainment, and politics. As a result, this technology came to dominate society. Our insights deepened, and in 2019, we stopped Fazzination and made the code public. Adding new software was no longer contributing to our mission of counteracting the effects of Social Mass Media technology. We concluded that a new paradigm of "soft technology" is needed, alongside Heidegger's concept of "Gestell" in hard technology.4.
Too much communication in too little time to process
Social Mass Media Technology counters the vitality and diversity of ideas, but even diversity of human life itself. The constant flow of information contributes to the idea that too much communication in too little time reduces diversity in both biological and cultural systems.In 1983 the French sociologist and philosopher Baudrillard argued the social has vanished altogether and is resurrected by a structure where everyone is each others hostage ánd terrorist. This is a accurate but gruesome depiction of todays social mass media society.5.
The Valley kills variation
US-based social technology is propelled by private capital that has been accumulated and managed in Silicon Valley since the 1950s. The business cases, business models, the growth acceleration, software architecture, algorithms, and ideological and commercial exploitation of this technology undermine the vitality of the human mind and social variation. Of course we are not only against US-based media and tech moguls, but also against EU-based ones like Qwans, Altrnative, or Talpa or Chinese platforms that misuse their users.6.
Study the basics of the business
Soft Technology EU is not about creating new software, which would not make sense and would only exacerbate existing problems. Instead, we have stopped coding and returned to the conceptual phase.We take the business case and business model of US tech real serious, but from another perspective. The social body cannot be longer the infrastructure for the business case, also because it is not equipped to handle too much communication in too little time. Likewise, the human mind is not meant to process desires for commercial exploitation. These are the two main constraints for Soft Technology EU.7.
Trump tweeting on a Dutch platform?
It is important to emphasise that Social Mass Media Technology operates without borders, while users are bound by time and geography. The EU and its member states treat the digital sphere as a global sphere, and in doing so, an unfair level playing field is created. As a result the US invasion of technology and ideology is unprecedented and can not been properly challenged.Have you wondered why US companies and their shareholders are allowed to create immense surplus value, personal wealth, and social and mental damage leading to violence, division, and depression? In the US, this is part of the American dream, but in Europe, it is a nightmare, and US tech gets a free lunch. We Europeans are being foolish. Imagine if the situation were reversed, and the EU took over the US mental, social, political, popular, and media fabric, exploiting and perverting it. How would Musk, Cook, or Bezos like that? Or Trump tweeting on a Dutch platform?8.
Tech takes over the world
The US cultural hegemony began with advertising after World War I, and with commercial television after World War II. It has since hijacked societies all over the world and owns most of today's information, social, and media infrastructure. As a result, it is flooding the world with mental and social garbage and spreading sameness. Alternatively, it completely takes over public sectors and turns them into business divisions. For example, France recently kicked Microsoft out of the education system, where it had complete control over the educational information infrastructure. This is standard operating procedure for Microsoft and its friends, such as Meta, AMS, Oracle, IBM, Google, Apple, Twitter, etc., in many sectors and spheres in EU countries.9.
Good protectionism
Soft Technology EU is not bringing moral and ethical concerns in order to avoid tech wrecks. Instead, we take the mechanisms of capitalism seriously and deconstruct their economic principles to create EU freedom from US technology and from hard technology in general.10.
Art fights the Gestell
Unlike EU alternatives to US social media – such as the Dutch initiative "Public Spaces" – we do not believe that redefining "social" or "public" or applying new design principles can improve communication in late capitalism. The internet is not broken, as some people would have us believe, but rather functions as Heidegger's "Gestell" described in 1953. New technology is not possible when it, unaware, is grounded in the idea of progress.An earlier Dutch concept called "The Digital City," was the potential dystopian precursor to todays Metaverse. The order of themes, verticals and control were already present in this early Internet. In the end, Gestell rules. Soft Technology EU explores how to counter Gestell.Heidegger ends his book 'About the question of technology' (1953) with the notion that there is one area of production where 'Gestell' is not present; in the world and making of art.11.
Anti-fascist life
We are inspired by Deleuze / Guattari and Michel Foucault's contributions to the "rules" for living an anti-fascist life. The idea that a collective exists as 'real' and is not continuously mutating, is todays meme of social formation. Technology now further solidifies what should be kept flowing and changing.12.
Disinformation doesn't exist
Disinformation doesn't exist in non-Gestell technology. The 'dis' in disinformation is confusing. It is not the information which disfunctions, it is the architecture, and the technical mechanisms which value nonsens over sense. The circulation of content prevails over the content of content.13.
Transparency and permeability
Transparency has become, strangely enough, a integral part of of the reasoning of Gestell, in the same way privacy or disinformation dominates the debates over the general negative tendencies of Social Mass Media Technology like homogenisation and decreasing variety. Without wanting to downplay privacy and transparency we argue permeability is a crucial and important architectural instrument to establish a more relational technology.Transparency refers to the degree to which information and decision-making processes are open and accessible to the public. It implies that information and decision-making processes are easily understood and accessible, and that there is no secrecy or hidden agendas at play. In a political context, transparency is often seen as a key component of good governance, as it helps to ensure accountability and prevent corruption. In an information systems context, transparency refers to the degree to which the inner workings of a system are visible and understandable to users.Permeability, on the other hand, refers to the degree to which an organisation or system is open to outside influence and the flow of information and ideas. It implies that an organisation or system is receptive to outside perspectives and willing to consider and incorporate them into its decision-making processes. In a political context, permeability can refer to the extent to which an organisation or government is open to the influence of external stakeholders and willing to consider their perspectives and input. In an information systems context, permeability refers to the degree to which a system is open to the flow of information from external sources and able to integrate and make use of that information.Transparency is often emphasised more than permeability, particularly in discussions of technology and its impact on society. There is a general recognition that transparency is important for understanding and potentially influencing the systems and algorithms that shape our lives, and calls for greater transparency are often made in order to increase accountability and ensure that these systems are operating in a responsible and ethical manner.Permeability, on the other hand, is less often emphasised in these discuss

First concepts about limiting the impact of Social Mass Media Tech in the European Union.

As it is > how it could be:USER
Goal: an awakening subjectivity- Social relations > Ideation and knowledge- User Identity is provided > 3rd parties are accepted on Digital ID and all are managed in one personal dashboard for deletion or migration- One org with n users > One user with n orgs- Privately owned > User becomes shareholder- Admin > Users in controlARCHITECTURE OF OPEN CLOUDSGoal: Do not mimic nor remediate real world architectural binary analogies like 'organisations', 'spaces'. Forget them and rethink digital architecture in a Deleuzian way- Security/fear > Permeable by design. Build on the trust others provide- Public Clouds- Focus on transparency > transparency AND permeability- Sectoral > Horizontal.
Silos and verticals are creating boundaries we cannot cross and keep people illiterate from different world views.OPTIONAL NOT GENERALOrganisation applications > Thin client via collective broker.CONTENT
Goal: Awakening subjectivity, appreciative, smart labels, diversity, findability, deepening not flattening, transversal- Crumbled > make transversal connections- Content half-life short > long and evolving- Sectoral > Horizontal- Wiki Truth > Multiple connected Napoleons- Themes > No social accelerated content structures- Rules based > TinkeringLEGAL
Goal: Do not pollute young mind / brain and identity processes nor the social body- No access for youth under 16- Users own data and can migrate- Multi-language/country moderation- Org and governmental AI > Algorithms distributed via public brokerECONOMICS
Goal: No free lunch in unregulated areas, and society and its health is public interest, not private- When governments co-invest, they participate and share in revenues. Open IP.- US or Chinese Social platforms > Entry costs p/y to access EU with strict rules/controlled algorithms- EU becomes shareholder in AMS and other US clouds.- Laws against cybersurveillance

The patterns that connect

Contribute and / or keep informed

Have a nice day! And keep safe

We keep you informed

Continue