Last year a meth addict boosted my Macbook pro from a car I had parked behind a Whole Foods in San Francisco. If it weren’t for Dropbox, I wouldn’t have been able to delete my important files from the machine and I also would not have known he used it to burn porn dvds.
I’ve been pretty good at backing up important things, and I had been using Dropbox on the machine for a few months. I had passwords, important documents, tax stuff… everything in my Dropbox folder. I was using 2 computers at the time, and Dropbox would instantly sync all my files instantly between them. Every revision of every file is also stored, so you’ll see the history of every single change–you can even undelete files you used years ago. When my computer was stolen, to remove all my files all I had to do was log into the web interface of my Dropbox and delete it all. I knew that when the perp booted up my machine, Dropbox would delete things for me. He wouldn’t see jack, and assuming their technical expertise I knew they couldn’t undelete those deleted files.
About two weeks after I deleted all my top secret files from my Dropbox, I was still using Dropbox but in a new account. I figured I could see if there was any activity on my stolen laptop–if they use the Dropbox or connect to the internet. Sure enough, they were using my poor lappy to burn Porn DVDs. In my Dropbox was the incomplete dvdrip of ‘Dominatrix 4’ish dvd.
Help me out: I’m running out of space on my dropbox. If you sign up to Dropbox by clicking the logo above, I get more free space! (Yes, this means I may gain from YOU reading this positive review). If you do sign up, you too can discover the nefarious activities of the porn crazed meth addict!
“Social network sites risk infantilising the mid-21st century mind, leaving it characterised by short attention spans, sensationalism, inability to empathise and a shaky sense of identity”
“real conversation in real time may eventually give way to these sanitised and easier screen dialogues, in much the same way as killing, skinning and butchering an animal to eat has been replaced by the convenience of packages of meat on the supermarket shelf. Perhaps future generations will recoil with similar horror at the messiness, unpredictability and immediate personal involvement of a three-dimensional, real-time interaction.”
I’d like to bring your attention to some interesting internet-only exhibits via my friend and sister, the hardest working students at CCA. (Arden and Katie).
To say that the World Wide Web has changed the way Americans go about their daily lives is an understatement. From methods of communication and information exchange to product marketing and avenues of immediate gratification, the Internet has opened doors for entrepreneurs and creative thinkers as well as those with less than noble intentions. Like the universe it purports to mimic, the Internet is ever expanding. The present is combined with the past and the predictions of the future, leaving layers upon layers of words, text and images piling up into a boundless mountain. The following list is a selection of instructional, resource-based, and creative websites found amongst the highways, byways, and mainframes of the World Wide Web, ranging from the sensational to the serious—a mere sampling of the virtual American melting pot. Vanity, money, fear, and an unyielding desire for convenience are dominant themes in this brief glimpse of the seedy underbelly of a Google search.
Through the Bad Moon Rising email exhibition series, NAIL curators have provided insight on artists who utilize the web for publicity, concept, or artistic tool, and this list revisits those websites, often drawing unforeseen parallels between the spaces of the artists’ work and the cacophony of the Web itself.
Parker Ito is a pixel prospector, a miner of the internet. For him, HTML code is the 21st-century’s answer to Duchamp’s readymade and the porn star is the new artistic muse. In this recent work, found video clips of ice cream, candy, splattered paint, and fireworks are overlaid with clips of online pornography to create a layered and textured core sample of the pleasures and vices of the World Wide Web. Beautiful, yet repellent and strange, Ito’s videos, websites, and paintings explore and push at the boundaries of the image-saturated, hyper-technological reality of our age. CLICK HERE TO VIEW (NSFW)
Or at least that’s the problem with blogging. What’s sensational? What’s easy to scan during your lunch hour? Tough reporting requires engaged citizens who ask questions and want to dig deep into the issues. Journalists–in the traditional sense–are becoming more rare. A blogger is a writer, but some are merely collectors, remixers, and reposters. (I’m currently at 10% original, 90% reposting)
Bill Keller, executive editor of the NYtimes, recently sat down to respond to the dire predictions of readers. Though the topic was inherently financial, he instead spoke eloquently about the values of journalism. Print isn’t dying, good journalism is:
First, there is a diminishing supply of quality journalism, and a growing demand. By quality journalism I mean the kind that involves experienced reporters going places, bearing witness, digging into records, developing sources, checking and double-checking, backed by editors who try to enforce high standards. I mean journalism that, however imperfect, labors hard to be trustworthy, to supply you with the information you need to be an engaged citizen. The supply of this kind of journalism is declining because it is hard, expensive, sometimes dangerous work. The traditional practitioners of this craft — mainly newspapers — have been downsizing or declaring bankruptcy. The wonderful florescence of communication ignited by the Internet contains countless voices riffing on the journalism of others but not so many that do serious reporting of their own. Hence the dwindling supply. The best evidence of the soaring demand is the phenomenal traffic to the Web sites that do dependable news reporting — nearly 20 million unique monthly visitors to the site you are currently reading, and that number excludes the burgeoning international audience. The law of supply and demand suggests that the market will find a way to make the demand pay for the supply.
There is no end of faith-based polemics on the subject of newspapers’ survival. Print is dead! Online readers must pay for content! Online readers will never pay for content! Give newspapers endowments, like universities! We should be a little suspicious of ironclad certainty. The fact is, we don’t really know yet how the behavior of readers and advertisers will evolve. We don’t really know for sure how to separate the consequences of a calamitous economic crisis from the enduring changes in behavior provoked by new technologies. I think in the next year or two, we must examine all our options with an open mind, test those that are testable, and make some hard choices. My expectation (and I remind you of the disclaimers regarding my business acumen) is that for the foreseeable future our business will continue to be a mix of print and online journalism, with the growth online offsetting the (gradual, we hope) decline of print.
It should come as no surprise that Shephard Fairey’s poster counts as fair use. Jonathan Melber lays down some more reasons why the AP’s case against him is groundless. [via]:
And the other “fair use” factors? Well, Fairey didn’t harm the commercial value of Garcia’s photograph–he vastly increased it. Danziger Projects, a contemporary gallery in New York City, is selling a limited edition of the original picture, signed by Garcia, for $1200 each. (The Museum of Fine Arts in Houston has already bought one for its permanent collection.)
So why is the AP acting like it has a case? Because juries are unpredictable, copyright law is confusing and defending a copyright lawsuit is extremely expensive. So powerful companies like the AP don’t necessarily care whether they would win. They know that most artists cannot afford to hire lawyers, and that even the ones who can will probably prefer to settle out of court than get dragged through three years of litigation.
Shephard Fairey has donated all revenues from his project (as far as I’ve heard) to charities.
There’s been a lot of talk about ‘the twitter’ recently. My advice to people who don’t know what it is: don’t let someone else tell you what it is, try it out! But stay away from the real shaq, for he will only make you question the nature of cinema.