>I would go so far as to say that ANY musical instrument is a kind of
>computer, and leave the statement open to debate.
They have some very fundamental similarities.
>2. ((Interaction))
>
>This notorious word has gained a lot of currency in the past few decades,
>but to me it's usage remains somewhat bogus.
Most people have actually dropped the term. My
lab, for example, has just dropped the term in
its name (cf. signature below, haven't had the
time to change it btw).
About a year back or so we all agreed that it was
a useless term, and this coming from people that
had written important papers, research, and
publications, and even (in my case) gotten a
degree based on that word.
> For me interaction is basically
>Newton's Third Law, which guarantees that every time you hit your head
>upon a wall, you will feel a lot of hurt.
Well, actually if you go back to cybernetics,
interactivity is a far richer word and totally
redefines the activity and the subject.
Unfortunately though, and this has become so
true, it is now understood as a sort of very
subjective wishful thinking, and so for many
people just smoke and mirrors.
> Now over time you may feel that hitting
>a wall with your head may not be such a wise
>thing to do, and then what remains
>in adulthood is the subconscious definition of
>wall - 'not to be struck with head'.
>I think the physics of our world is interactive at every level,
Well, again, interactivity was about something
far more specific that interacting with things,
people, space, etc. But we need to loose the word
totally, before we can go back to. Again, I'd
suggest that we go back to it via cybernetics
then see how we can get past that whole paradigm.
> and therefore
>to say that interaction is a result of
>automative sensor-response computations is
>not very wise.
Yeah, again, I'd have a gazillion things to say
on that one, but we'll leave that for another
debate.
>3. ((language/linguistic))
>
>Surely the title of this thread should have been "non-textual programming",
>since even visual flowcharts or coding systems are languages in the formal
>sense?
Hmmm...
--
/*
// Douglas Edric Stanley
<douglas_at_abstractmachine.net>
// Artiste
http://www.abstractmachine.net
// Professeur d'Arts numeriques, L'école supérieure d'art d'Aix-en-provence
http://www.ecole-art-aix.fr/
// Chercheur, Laboratoire Esthétique de l'interactivité, Université de Paris 8
http://www.ciren.org
*/
Received on Thu Jan 10 2008 - 00:31:16 GMT