paul van der walt via nettime-l on Sun, 21 Apr 2024 04:53:33 +0200 (CEST)
|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> Swipe, a Smart Phone Movie by Mieke Gerritzen/Next Nature
|
- To: "<nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: <nettime> Swipe, a Smart Phone Movie by Mieke Gerritzen/Next Nature
- From: paul van der walt via nettime-l <[email protected]>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 12:43:38 +1000
- Authentication-results: nettime.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=lists.nettime.org [email protected] header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=jdX5Ak0+; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=denknerd.org [email protected] header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=e91H0Mn5; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com [email protected] header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=NORQXhcY; dkim-atps=neutral
- Cc: paul van der walt <[email protected]>
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 lists.servus.at 0A2211007C69
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.nettime.org; s=default; t=1713668007; bh=HFeVeEyFvUkgm+LCBhhrQXNHrnYWtX0OLeI3yD6yq6Q=; h=References:To:Date:In-reply-to:Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=jdX5Ak0+Vo7Msz4PqjDSxd2zFBQAOttwiDlDAlvb65ahdSnpfLiE6qNAas7DZpamE erRJZ0TRwCapFAx2D1iow6BfMMca2H87MMCtmszblVfC1qeWbu0gq9bRfCRR0fOHDu a4SA4N9COtVYwxKEtlVCRa4FgQqzt94moSZ+l9+Q=
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=denknerd.org; h= cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1713667973; x=1713754373; bh=RUpcqSrHdR qQ13nns5cayMM/2tKL1VS+DHufGlAh1eE=; b=e91H0Mn5sdZ4w1oBstbxvLxWK5 /zLTk8ce0K4Mf3Hv6HV8T+TRShIt0aIsZSf/KfVJT8DDDN6yIik6cnv/axkPZ+e/ JsEiLz7NELD6z/WwJJcePZ6nJmPhUShHVHRmMk6VdN00F8J4gM2vcK6oAiU9zuTL biuvZFg2nhZoRj2Vs4r0RV/wPtWO8hlbVb82xex7OU/N5ERHh+94B6ghCBLd76gT +y4HTRNiVKgVOhrE5U3QiL/kY3GZGgYZpR6aSgQrHL0aiePj8BRNFqkP9N6I9Bcg CkkdYs+5dmUrFRenbSVkbsCdiZ5mcl9xA3+fHQfAnzEUiPCgHMoKZQvNz+Og==
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1713667973; x=1713754373; bh=RUpcqSrHdRqQ13nns5cayMM/2tKL 1VS+DHufGlAh1eE=; b=NORQXhcYPT1RofY8k8kc8Y7Zw4RE1qbhrenCrv3C47Y6 rG92kc5K/2E8vBWuCbV6w2JXn1b3LEwBdriRO4sFQCEHD7KAPVjfpROPPjjSwGfm vyfm+YgV7RZgysS2H/VZ8XB9xhWRqWcAtcifY21rrFr284Q74sj6mae8AuANSGA4 JvccJnXOR7e70fFtcJnU62D7+LnWTS+zs0uwCI2z2tXEzonKpwwHfkLiecF3ZQVl ES6ouOeeBKKfp4XpHZqAB+IiFbPl8XcUFBJFRCDawmBTUqn7LWSj5jHRau/JsofX 7N+IGggdCfPRc2xWd1j1Ja1EJYDFjQsEqI12IffxBQ==
- Feedback-id: ida814920:Fastmail
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <CAF3eCHEJXsD7PVUM7mkSZZ41dteaaMNNLnCu_Rg7xPJNmfbkNg@mail.gmail.com> <CANuiTgyBJ67eyFi7mJWBOuZFHrHykcFjXVotffesYiKaG2o0FQ@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]>
- Reply-to: "<nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets" <[email protected]>
- User-agent: mu4e 1.10.8; emacs 29.1
Christian,
I'm curious about whether you're making a theoretical or practical point.
On 2024-04-20 at 14:49 +02, quoth Christian Swertz via nettime-l <[email protected]>:
> [...] this one:
>> How not to be parasitic to the point of necrotrophy?
> is easy. No car, no airplanes etc. Less computers too, of course. No consumerism.
I understand you're saying that in some sense the practical answer is easy - we know how to get ourselves out of the particular eco-collapse mess.
>> but it's still uncertain whether we can choose not to.
>
> is simple to: No. "We" cannot. [...]
You also point out that realistically, since we have so little (none?) influence being merely single organisms in this "super organism" that all humans form collectively.
Do i understand your argument correctly? If so, it leaves me feeling like perhaps it's a bit of an intellectual dead end - given these two observations, there doesn't seem to be a rational argument to be made to not live our last days hedonistically, while Rome burns, as it were. An impasse is sketched, where doom is inevitable and our only influence is over us and ours.
I don't imagine this is your standpoint, but on the other hand i don't feel like i can refute either your "obvious solution" nor the observation that it's extremely unlikely we'll be able to coordinate and implement it, humanity-wide.
Perhaps that's something to just try and make peace with. It leaves me feeling like i'm missing something, though. This might stem from my received western-ish capitalist-ish worldviews where everything can be done with enough technology/goodwill/idealism (strike through as appropriate), which is of course a fairy tale.
Kind regards,
p.
--
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: [email protected]