the “salt of life.”

hollow answers

Emotionen

ISBN

Sie produzieren

Werkstoff

Medienmacht

Wenn von vornherein klar ist, dass nachher viele oder gar alle gemeinsam regieren, lassen sich kaum glaubwürdig “Schicksalswahlen” beschwören.

entwickeln

Formulierungen

Verwaltungsdeutsch

Geschichte

Aufmerksamkeit

Zeit

Redesituation

Gesten

Kleidung

kommunizieren

Performativität

gesprochene Sprache

Schrift

Dialog

Bild

Text

Wort

Medium

"This suggests that life may be flourishing on Earth-like biospheres elsewhere in the universe," Donoghue said.

By doing away with deliberation, a cornerstone of liberal democratic politics, right wing populism seems to have found the key to success in our fast paced society. For an increasingly large number of voters, time to think or reflect seems to be nothing more than a hindrance to effective decision making, and it is this line of thought that is swelling the ranks of the far right.

Technology has made impatience the norm.

In the meantime, we're all missing out on the benefits of (a) capturing images in wider gamuts today so we can view them in years to come, and (b) having systems and displays today that can be somewhere on the journey between the very limited sRGB/Rec709 standards of the previous century, and the inevitable landing spot of achieving full Rec2100 style displays everywhere into the future. Rejecting HDR now because we can only make it half way between the current spec and that goal misses the entire point of gradual improvement, and especially the benefit of capturing content today to view it on better displays in years to come.

For approximate reference, sRGB/Rec709 cover roughly 35% of visible colour. DCI-P3/Display-P3/AdobeRGB cover roughly 50%, and Rec2020/2100 covers roughly 75%. So even "HDR" standards don't cover everything a human being is capable of seeing.

team management

they know how to separate concerns and reduce coupling

So have little way to mediate the #closedweb problem of the groups who “succeed” in a capitalist being the worst equipped to solve the problems that the system creates.

"Vichy France and the Jews" by Michael Marrus and Robert Paxton

This was all done after — sometimes considerably after — much better conceptions of what the web experience and powers should be like. It looks like “a hack that grew”, in part because most users and developers were happy with what it did do, and had no idea of what else it *should do* (and especially the larger destinies of computer media on world-wide networks).To try to answer the question, let me use “Licklider’s Vision” from the early 60s: “the destiny of computing is to become interactive intellectual amplifiers for all humanity pervasively networked worldwide”.This doesn’t work if you only try to imitate old media, and especially the difficult to compose and edit properties of old media.

9781914487156

Acting upon technology without concern for equity, capabilities and democracy in general is a slippery trap as well.

deren

tiefe

A picture which shows you as you are, with all your hopes, fears, weaknesses, glory and absurdness, and – as far as possible – includes everything that you ever hope to be. […] Decide which of the two is the better picture of all that?”

des eigenen ewigen Selbst

“But what, if, objectively, the phenomenon we call life cannot be measured by any other method? […] In this history, using the mirror of the self to measure the presence of living structure, though highly unusual, would be merely one more step in the evolution of the observational methods needed to deal truthfully with reality as it is”

Ohne Gefühl

affektive

Wenn Beziehungen und Menschsein im Erkenntnisprozess mit abgebildet werden sollen, können auch Gefühle nicht außen vor bleiben.

einer trennende

Dies für

Dabei bietet gerade der christliche Glaube ein unerhörtes Potenzial, die von Margaret Stout behaupteten Dualitäten aufzulösen, ja zu durchkreuzen.

realistisch, ja natürlich

OpenOffice

Das "postmetaphysische Zeitalter" war nur eine Phase. Die Ontologie ist zurück.

The problem is not about Open Source or Free Software. The problem is everything else.

In the long term, our only hope is to build stronger commons. Every day, we must fight to protect and improve the commons while letting corporations have as little power as we can over it and over our lives.

All of this made possible thanks to open source and millions of hours worked for free by people who contributed to what we thought was "the commons".

We should also insist that every piece of technology is, by essence, political. That you cannot understand technology without understanding the people. And you cannot understand people without understanding politics. Every choice you made has an impact on the world.

We can live without Google, Facebook Microsoft, Apple, Amazon. We can write code which is not on Github, which doesn’t run on an Amazon server and which is not displayed in a Google browser.

They understand that they are two classes of coders in the world: those who are exploited without being paid and those who are paid to be exploited. A bit or even more in some cases. While a few hands keep all the power.

They don’t search, they Google, they don’t shop online, they go on Amazon, they don’t read a book but a Kindle, they don’t take a coffee but a Starbucks.

There’s a generational divide here. Brilliant coders now on the market or in the free software space have never known a world without Google, Facebook and Github. Their definition of software is "something running in the browser". Even email is, for them, a synonym for the proprietary messaging system called "Gmail" or "Outlook". They contribute to FLOSS on Github while chatting on Slack or Discord, sharing specifications on Google Drive and advertising their project on Twitter/X. They also often have an iPhone and a Mac because "shiny". They cannot imagine an alternative world where monopolies would not be everywhere. They feel that having nice Github and Linkedin profiles where they work for free is the only hope they have to escape unemployment.

It is not by accident that those distributions care a lot about the license of the software they distribute.

A git repository is a development tool, not a distribution mechanism for end users.

So, what can we do? In the short term, it’s very simple. If you care about the commons, you should put your work under a strong copyleft license like the AGPL. That way, we will get back to building that commons we lost because of web services. If someone ever complains that a web service broke because of your AGPL code, reply that the whole web service should be under the AGPL too.

Paid and unpaid open source developers are pressed into providing a support they never promised in the first time.

free software is provided, "without liability". That rule should be enforced.

paying the contributor/maintainer a dime is not the solution. It worsen the situation. It acknowledges the responsibility of the aforementioned maintainer and legitimises the exploitation.

When publicly distributed, the open-source code is hidden behind layers of indirection bypassing any packaging/integration effort, relying instead on virtualisation and downloading dependencies on the fly. Thanks to those strategies, corporations could benefit from open source code without any consequence. The open source code is, anyway, mostly hosted and developed on proprietary platforms.

On call. Incident response. Compliance deadlines. Like any IT job, stuff breaks. Long unpaid hours keeping up on tech to remain competitive. Dealing with the politics of your management not sincerely wanting to spend the money required to do things right and

writing code, reviewing code, deploying configs to harden environments, reading CVEs to know just how bad that vulnerability in our environment is and where it prioritize it in patching and what it could affect, trying to make sense of logs to determine if that oddity is an indicator of compromise or not

Every Archive a Collage

Creating building systems in the present sense is not enough. We need a new, more subtle kind of building system

Most designers today think of themselves as the designers of objects. If we follow the argument presented here, we reach a very different conclusion. To make objects with complex holistic properties, it is necessary to invent generating systems which will generate objects with the required holistic properties.

processes which then maintain the system’s equilibrium

Alexander doesn’t rule out spontaneous order, but sees that as a rare event.  For a system as a whole to have the properties desired, the builders will most probably have to have a generating system to create the system as a whole.

A generating system, in this sense, may have a very simple kit of parts, and very  simple rules.

The formal systems of mathematics are systems in this sense. The parts numbers, variables, and signs like + and =. The rules specify ways of combining three parts to form expressions, and ways of forming expressions from other expressions, and ways of forming true sentences from expressions, and ways of forming true sentences from other true sentences. The combinations of parts, generated by such a system, are the true sentences, hence theorems, of mathematics. Any combination of parts which is not formed according to the rules is either meaningless or false

We must not use the word system, then, to refer to an object. A system is an abstraction. It is not a special kind of thing, but a special way of looking at a thing.

In order to speak of something as a system, we must be able to state clearly: (1) the holistic behaviour which we are focusing on; (2) the parts within the thing, and the interactions among these parts, which cause the holistic behaviour we have defined; (3) the way in which this interaction, among these parts, causes the holistic behaviour defined. If we can do these three, it means we have an abstract working model of the holistic behaviour in the thing. In this case, we may properly call the thing a system, If we cannot do these three, we have no model, and it is meaningless to call the thing a system.

Stability, no matter in which of its many forms, is a holistic property. It can only be understood as a product of interaction among parts.

The most important properties which anything can have are those properties that deal with its stability.

holistic behaviour is that instability which occurs in objects that are very vulnerable to a change in one part: when one part changes,

The pattern form excels an engaging the reader in generative solutions: to understand the principles and values of lasting solutions and long-term emergent behavior. Good patterns go beyond the quick fix.

we need to address most interesting problems with emergent behavior.

… a fundamental characteristic of complex human systems … [is that] cause and effect are not close in time and space. By effects, I mean the obvious symptoms that indicate that there are problems drug abuse, unemployment, starving children, falling orders, and sagging profits. By cause I mean the interaction of the underlying system that is most responsible for generating the symptoms, and which, if recognized, could lead to changes producing lasting improvement. Why is this a problem? Because most of us assume they are most of us assume, most of the time, that cause and effect are close in time and space.

What, exactly, does it mean to say that structures generate particular patterns of behavior?

Lao Tsu principles of nonaction

Thus, as in the case of natural languages, the pattern language is generative. It not only tells us the rules of arrangement, but shows us how to construct arrangements as many as we want which satisfy the rules.

a means of letting the problem resolve itself over time, just as a flower unfolds from its seed

The structures of a pattern are not themselves solutions, but they generate solutions.

we often attack only symptoms, leaving the underlying problem unresolved.

Generative patterns work indirectly; they work on the underlying structure of a problem (which may not be manifest in the problem) rather than attacking the problem directly. Good design patterns are like that: they encode the deep structure (in the Senge sense) of a solution and its associated forces, rather than cataloging a solution.

emergence is a property of a whole that is not a property in its parts.

how such a system is born, itself, of a generative system, establishing the duality between the object as a computing agent and the method as a computational process.

design forms through the iterative readings and responses to interrelational conditions, with the intention of producing environments synchronous with their cultural settings.

computation of such interrelational, complex behaviour-based systems

The system behaviour emerges only in the dynamics of the interactions of the parts. This is not a cumulative linear effect but rather a cyclical causal effect

states

an overall design problem cannot be divided into sub-problems, and consequently, that it is impossible to arrive at a novel design solution as a summary process of solving individual problems one after the other

complex systems of interactions and reciprocities

critique on classic physics and its deductive methods and focus on isolated phenomena. Bertalanffy considered such methods as unsuitable for biology

Ultrastability places two sets of environmental and reactive variables in a primary feedback loop. A slower, second feedback affects the reactive variables by acting on the step-mechanisms and setting parameters for the environmental variables.

In order to develop a model for stability in design problems, Alexander looked to cybernetics for models of homeostasis and ultrastability. Such systems could stabilize themselves regardless of what disturbed them, including variables that weren’t considered when the system was designed.

Alexander would also step away from the notion of a semantic network and more toward the pursuit of the geometrics of order.

the language provides the framework for using the patterns as a program to create form.  But he aims for semantics, allegory, and poetics, as well as the aspects of language that generate feelings, emotions, a sense of order — all of which extend beyond the structural, topological and syntactic aspects of his program.

meanings and their evocations

networks

the sophistication of a semantic network

“Next, several acts of building, each one done to repair and magnify the product of the previous acts, will slowly generate a larger and more complex whole than any single act can generate,”

accretion

unfolding

systems may come to necessitate their own propagation, he suggests, when we use them.

In an interview with his biographer, Alexander noted, “We give names to things but we don’t give many names to relationships.”

a rule set

pattern languages contain an inherent rule set that determines their logic

context

genetics

Almost every ‘system as a whole’ is generated by a ‘generating system’. If we wish to make things which function as ‘wholes’ we shall have to invent generating systems to create them.