Code & Power: Discussion Notes
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Code & Power: Discussion Notes






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



2 Embeds 61 60 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Code & Power: Discussion Notes Code & Power: Discussion Notes Presentation Transcript

  • Code and Power CCR 633 ::: 4/14/11Friday, April 15, 2011
  • code as writingFriday, April 15, 2011
  • critical code studiesFriday, April 15, 2011
  • What shifts when writing isn’t human-readable?Friday, April 15, 2011
  • “Code is the only language that is executable, meaning that it is the first discourse that is materially affective.” - Alexander Galloway, ProtocolFriday, April 15, 2011
  • How do we split agency between humans and machines?Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Who is doing what to whom? For whom? How does technology reinforce or facilitate that?Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Does the context of war continue to influence these technologies?Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Heinrich HimmlerFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Dr. Josef MengeleFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Nazis were not just monstrous grown-upsFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Luftwaffe PilotFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • SS-Sturmman, Wiking DivisionFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Not just men, either.Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Eva BraunFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Irma GreseFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Senior Auschwitz SupervisorFriday, April 15, 2011
  • 30,000 prisonersFriday, April 15, 2011
  • 19 years oldFriday, April 15, 2011
  • ordinary peopleFriday, April 15, 2011
  • not so different from usFriday, April 15, 2011
  • who did the daily work of the Holocaust.Friday, April 15, 2011
  • LaToya: we can see nothing happens in vacuum. There is no direct link between new technologies and their consequences whether they are good, bad, or somewhere in the middle; there is always a middle man, woman, group, or human force whose will and/ or intention is the determining factor. I maintain that there is no neutral technology where there is human influence. ... With this in mind, how can we re-member and learn from the ways that technology has been used in the past to oppress, or create conditions that oppress others? How might this process of re-membering inform and bring about more ethical practices in the future?Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Part 1: EniacFriday, April 15, 2011
  • “A computer was a human being until approximately 1945. After that date, the term referred to a machine and the former human computers became “operators.”Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • “The ENIAC was then told to solve a difficult problem that would have required several weeks’ work by a trained man. The ENIAC did it in exactly 15 seconds.” The “15 seconds” claim ignores the time women spent setting up each problem on the machine. (474)Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Tim: But this story is bigger than a story of inclusion. These stories are stories of war machines. Of “megamachines,” to quote Lewis Mumford via Cynthia Haynes. And this story is about the colonial price of inclusion in the halls of power–at any position. Because no matter how utopian Vannevar Bush made the memex sound, the ENIAC girls were partaking in–helping to perfect–machines of ultimate control. Death machines. The megamachine. What price, inclusion? What price, a more technical education and job? What price, to develop technologies that stop the Nazi’s (insert any other colonial monster here) and to enable them at the same time (remembering here the Onondaga land I’m actually on as I type this)? What price, to seek to include more and more in a system that cries out for radical transformation?Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Part II: HollerithFriday, April 15, 2011
  • Tim: all these inscription technologies, from clay tokens right up to punch cards and the ENIAC computer, have all been technologies originally developed as systems for those in power to control those without it. Whether it’s death (Hole 8), or taxes (clay tokens), technologies of inscription so often begin as systems of more efficient control.Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Friday, April 15, 2011
  • Tim: How might we, as teachers of art and writing inscription, continually politicize these technologies for ourselves and students? How might we inoculate ourselves against the silencing, the forgetting, the “oh gee, isn’t that cool?” that so often accompanies our professionalization, our technology use, our everyday practices, that we might work to be more like Minnie Bruce and excavate real use-able histories that might point us to better methods of imagination for transformation?Friday, April 15, 2011