The Catalogue of Social Taxonomy of Net Behavior

Still-Alive

What an extraordinary chorus of voices we have on the Furtherfield NetBehaviour list! As a composer, I am interested in how all the parts harmonize together polyphonically, rub up against each other contrapuntally, provide a sense of direction and perspective as the lines & melodies of our utterances collectively play out.

After the first week of discussion, here is a first pass at some categorical distinctions to provide us with a “social taxonomy” of net behaviorism. Subscribe to the NetBehaviour discussion list to participate & contribute & find out where you reside as a netartizen!

The Alarmists

  • @BishopZ >>>>> The Internet of Things will inevitably consolidate corporate power over our personal liberty.
  • @Alan >>>> The digital, I think, is unbearably fragile; not only is privacy lost, but we are not prepared, and can’t prepare, for the attacks and corrosion to come.
  • @Patrick >>>> I see a more profound short-term sense of (pessimism) in the youth in my regions of interaction.
  • @Dave >>>> The new breed of technologies might make it more obvious that government is entirely obsolete.
  • @Rob >>>>>>> The Cultural Smog Of The Internet… a paralysing weight rather than an inspiring force.
  • @Mez >>>>> Whatever the magnitude/form, online dialogues appear to be flooded with antagonistic commentary.

The Cynics

  • @Alan >>>>> Do you honestly believe, with all the hacking/corrosion/cyberwarfare going on, that regulations will make the slightest bit of difference?
  • @Edward >>>> But don’t hope for too much. They guys with the money hold all the good cards.
  • @Isabel >>>>> It’s worth being an artist for all sorts of reasons, but not particularly for social change.
  • @Simon >>>> Jumping on the digital bandwagon seems pointless.
  • @Karl >>>> there is a word for actor and audience in the social media realm: prosumer!
  • @Ruth >>>>> From the perspective of the platform providers, the purpose of the users actions and interactions is to squirt lucrative data.
  • @James >>>> The lines (of communication) are already open, we’re just sending information back and forth along them

The Realists

  • @Ruth >>>> Netartizen #tip3 Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr are not public.
  • @Johannes >>>>>>>>> (I) find the idea of artizen nation objectionable.
  • @Paul >>>> We all think we’re creating important and relevant work but if the future doesn’t come up with a way to extract and preserve it, then it probably didn’t mean that much to them.
  • @Marc >>>> What future artists need to know is that they can make their own contexts beyond the given structures, shoved down their metaphorical gullets.
  • @Edward >>>> I’m not sure I feel like a citizen of the net.
  • @Isabel >>>> There may be some degree of privilege involved in the possibility of being/contributing as a Netartizen/Netartisan.

The Apocalyptic

  • @Kath >>>>  If there is some pulse in the future which wipes all the technology we’ll be left with a gap from our digital/online years. let’s hope the libraries survive.
  • @Patrick >>>>> I feel that social media and the rise of infopower like the Arab Spring and ISIS, big data, stacks and Baynesian algorithms typify our time.
  • @Alan >>>> Who will be physical when the land is scorched? And perhaps more to the point, what are we, as NetArtizens doing/writing/ about it?

The Hopeful

  • @David >>>> Perhaps acting out of ignorance (is) an opportunity to create something that is truly new.
  • @Rob >>>> Claiming privatised (network) space for the public that is (supposedly economically) exploited to give it its value, and doing so under the banner of art, is a political strategy (for those of us who like political strategies) that has the potential to wrong-foot affective capital’s enclosures.
  • @Rob >>> Let’s make a net we want to be citizens of, for a while.
  • @Helen >>>>  I have long hunted for a good word for this – for audiences that are participating in a really creative way in a work – & i don’t just mean the “interactivity” of pressing a button or something like that. i mean co-authoring in a way that they can insert their own creativity & alter/influence the work.
  • @Randall >>> The modern day database, content management system, and social media offer new ways to fully integrate the artistic process into a dynamically-shared, distributed network.
  • @Ruth >>>> NetArtizen #tip1: initiate and participate in equal measure.

The Poets

  • @Bill >>>> Would be nice to have MANIC responses.
  • @Ruth >>>> NetArtizen #tip2 There is no one We.
  • @Mez >>>>> N.Et.A[l]rtizen #[s]tip[ewe.lation]3: S[m]o[dalities+fun]c[t]i[ons_]al[ways]media[ate]platform[at]s.
  • @Alan >>>>> Cultural heritage =  0000000067141066147020145071157060440063556066145063040.
  • @Dark >>>> 404 FILE NOT FOUND I am still alive.

The Dreamers

  • @Gil >>>>> I find out more about the world we live in from netbehaviour than from anywhere else.
  • @Randall >>> Let’s conceptualize an approach to networked systems that can be expressed with any social media platform we may invent or even dream of.
  • @BishopZ >>>> I had a dream one time of teams of artists paratrooping into troubled areas – delivering theatrical re-interpretations of local mythology – explaining in local vernacular the torment that locals faced.