About translation and absences: where is the translations? the blackboard is here, but used differently; the eye of the jenitor (care) negation: what you chose not to be (as a learning moment)? time: the temporality of the learning experience brakedowns: failures in relations and devices continuity: the 3 year process (the continuity of materials, methodologies, experiences) and also throughout the year (through networks)
relearn as an infrastructure ? in relation to traditional education infrastructure ? are we separating it or not ? infrastructure in relation with the city
oral transmission at relearn : distinction between memory and archive
+ Notes / friday 21st:::
pad dissemination / concentration :
possibility of all the traks
sketches (and their origin)
translation / remediation (ex: blackboard to pad)
caring / janitorial aspects
negation / not absences but choosing not to be present
time / scheduling
breakdown / failures (in relations, in devices)
continuity / persistence
people? (should people have its own spot here?)
looking at other models / experiences / references
in relation with infrastructure: (and not only in relation to traditional education)
but tradictional education is full of infrastructures!
For example: city as an infrastructure / can be looked at as a pedagogical environment in itself [scale]
when talking about archives and documentation: Relearn contains also memory // oral transmission and histories and narratives
differences between memory and archive is a process of validation
- how can we find the way to get to know each other -somehow- quickly?
There were many good ideas when preparing the school, but they need implementation ? we are so much into prototyping that we often miss materialization
(from the city track) [[city]] 'methodological toolbox' aknowledging the fact that you can't reduce the city to one specific aspect interesting similarity with the recent reroam discussion on 'pseudo-categories'... need an angle to give depth to the look, without pretending it's exhaustive.. aspects overlap all the time.
HOW & what (s) is going on-- 22.08, 15h
Quantified_Self Julianne: (this was unfortunately not captured by the note-taker)
on 'make human' - we need something that can be automated! as humans, we cannot see 200 python scripts!
about the significant aspect of concrete file -- interest on "MakeHuman": is it relating to the datasets from sensors already? -- that is in progress. by now staying outside of MH so there is no contamination the geometry is a bit different - distorted human meshes quantification paradigm, but self-built there is very little collected data on the datasets -- thought would be worthy to find other criteria / set new criteria for datasets also now producing new data (several possibilities, including generatin it ourselves) -- codification must be implemented into the tool for the making of the 3D characters
maybe the problematic point is on one hand the problematization of this paradigm, but on the other hand looking at how it can be better // paradox of criticizing and then also looking for implemenations
one the one hand you want to highlight the paradox, but maybe putting in something different could be interesting (instead: grrrr!) now in need of address the social aspects of this process talking about the "celibataire machine" / loneliness and the social >> adress maybe with some possible textual imput anecdote: the interface shows a character that performs, and there is now this idea of tamagotchization that measures body through steps, glasses of water, etc
would be happy to have more people joining
similar questions appearing, so they propose to do a common bridge. not so much on the tools, but on the vocabulary and common problematics -- we can cluster problems you are too fast! :P
at the moment people's trying to get going with some of the tools. Ge're getting there more or less, but now have to put it together in order to start common projects at the pad there is a number of tools there was quite a difference of skills and knowledges the group? how did it work? -- kind of organically? not so much programmers
there is nobody really trying to make some software development
started having a look at the Dada_Engine, install the tool, look at exixting scripts, get familiar with its language and syntax (which is all accessible)
Cath: a pair tried to write their own scrpt learning from the existing ones -- found a corporate page that could work for the Dada_Mining >> Oracle that could work with datamining content: lexic of divination methods
--- maybe join the wirelessness group?
Gijs: looking at some math and neural networks + Markoff chains explitting the ext in words and then select random order of sets that have no semantic meaning but works if you know the talker
Ana & Ricardo also working with Markoff chains -- looked into the code but then went in another way. Started plaing with a tech that uses M Chain for disabled people who cannot type on a keyboard. Used one interface of eyetracjking. You can put texts in. Hardware: a gaming interface (joystick), so somehow derivated into a playful item. It is a Markoff Chain with letters (unlike Gij's, wich works with words). it is a visual way that needs to be connected to something that makes more sense; still going somewhere :) started the linux kernel as first source :)) you can actually go backwards too
Sam: also on Markoff chain. started to use patters to start the sentences by some pronouns / as a database(source) using text from a french artist that links sources like french constitution with
hoping to combine tracks with text_gen: absured machine communication transmitting (...)
yesterday begin downloading the tools for listening to radio using your computer have this dvd stiks thtat can cover wide ranges of waves
listened around a bit also :) local frequencies: in bxl you have this emergency system that sends messages to ambulances and ambulances: txt messages that are sent through radio, but are digital data // if you listen is only noise, but you can actually decode them and make them readable
today tried to transmit some stuff
have some arcade transmitters and also some hi-fi
(test not possible at the moment)
will put a transmitter and send upstairs --
transmitting webpages -- nice because actually works! sending jpgs is another story -- would last for dys >> 100 bits/second
working on a prototype of using glass noodles as fiber optic and transmit through light -- but it's super slow by now -- perhaps with better noodls :P
cinematic geography of city -- what means to observe the city as a field of production and as in the production chain somehow today placed it on track: transform it into a city walk that tries to connect a kind of spots that somehow are exemplars of what they're looking for
project certain forms/formats of city 1)horta fachade: espectacular mode of the layer being instrumentalized. It is a diconstructed facade of a building by horta that has been reconstructed after being demolished and then abandoned due to lack of funds -- through a scanning and 3d modeling process // there is a website that better tells the story
it's interesting because this was found just by walking 500m around the zinneke building physical artifacts of the building that are hidden but if you scratch, actually find a bunch of layers and details
Dennis: since we're partly people from bxl and partly not, would like to look at places that could be intergrated on the walk with this in mind.
tomorrow morning from 10am, walk into the city with discussion
2)Parlamentarium: spectacular moment on the city, also very spctacular // moment of having videos to explain how/whos
so: examples from propoer cinema to actual phone filmings
3) also: all cinemas (film theaters) that are part of the transformation of the city now.
storage/reverberation of images
MArtino: drop a bit the historical level, but instead encounter stories without the need to look after them: not an extensive mapping of elements (for actually not re-doing, but more assess all the elements and phenomena that are connected through this topic of image production of/in the city)
power infrastructures could be also looked at
speaking of adjectives xml file: the word AMAZING mentioned twice, first time positivity was 0.8, then it was 0.4. Wordnet doest divide the two senses, pattern instead makes the average of 0.6.. amazing so the mathematical average reveals some discrepancy..
studying the math behind the algorithms used to detect meaning from projecting language in the mathematical space math->language; language->math
grammatical space of the adjectives as core elements of language. reading scientific papers to understand the rationale behind the workings of this systems.. they seem to break down quite quickly..
algorithms vs human intervention in specifying what means what loops of humans / algorithms.. what is pure mathematical? pattern?
algorithms has no notion of human beings. just numbers.
human intervention is fit for a starting point, to shape data to fit the algorithmic process (?) "raw data is an oxymoron" the act of selecting what to put in, telling the algorithm what is interesting on one hand you want to offload as much work as possible to the algorithm, but impossible to delegate everything -- the algorithm needs a sort of format to work, this is where the human aspect is necessary
statistics, math, linguistics, culture -- necessary to understand all facets of language
dada engine -----------------------------
Program for tomorrow: Walk starts at 10 There's food at Poissonerie Need to get someone to open/close the space, put out the trash tomorrow night Possible storm in the afternoon
about the improvised round of presentations: there was no clear plan, nor timing, it started as a sharing in few minutes the issues/problems/asking help it ended as a presentation with no time limits, showing what is being done-->did it work? that it was not planned->more observations/sharing failures and attempts than outcomes or provisional plans sunday meeting: there were diff expectations. (practical issues/ frustrations/ things to change now/ general feedback/ school/ ...) some issues that are really pressing were pushed aside by abstraction why to separate the presentation and plenary? isolating reroam?-->becomes abstracter and abstracter also in the other day presentations there was the intention to keep the two aspects together, but it slides one side or another group dynamics and group output-->some track already plan to work further, long term engagemnet, no output for presentation (->define output) idea of dividing in groups and tasks starting from today: there are organizational tasks and issues to be discussed (e.g. presentation).like in the first day soup track, people leave in turns and take 1 hour to work together. do we want a collective moment? it is collective even in smaller groups -->it should not be per track-->this is something people joining these conversation agree on but participants perhaps not *the problem of the making of tracks-->the website/the continuity/dynamics *same for presentation_>was on the program since beginning, some people perceive it as challenge/ other pressure/ anyway it is acknowledged
*problem of shifting language/perspective in plenaries (shadowing the concrete experiences). always bring in the "ideal", abstract analysis, vocabulary--confusing.create the very separation it tries to overcome ---> we need some different opinions on this point, why/what/how about the closing plenary.
*dynamics around inner garden/wirelessness track/ a station because elements people can relate not as track (e.g. physical elements, devices, less abstraction, tangible, noisy things)-->square, till late in the night *new elements circulating *city track-->a moment of claiming it as something done already? or attempt to contextualize/connect?but not actually inputting, joining, bringing on the table these materials and existing realities
*format presentation->in any case should not be a last moment surprise what this is, have to deal with existing expectations, assumptions (e.g. people call it "final presentation") e.g. normally knowing there will be a presentaton you prepare to use a beamer etc, in this case you prepare for discussing together these points but don't need to do it in the morning but during script itself. time points: (to be shared in the morning) 1)server->something on/in/about the local server that you want to talk about.[ a)something you put on the server, b)something you found there c)where in the server(and why)?] exploring others contributions and ways of contributing 2)breakdown/malfunctioning/failure: describe something that went wrong (tool/social dynamics/devices/food/planning etc) 3)what did you work on during the week? did you put it on the server? 4)something about space/time/program/"designed elements"(e.g. scripts) --------->>a point about organizing together the party(tasks etc) to work like the" soup braid". dealing with space, organizing etc.[hard scripted point] 5)something about continuity/what do you take/where does it go what about using these points for temporary documentation/guide to repository?(e.g. print and bind or online)--->linking to other oad. the way to have overview even through the small group formats or: be aware that there will be a documentation//publication group
proposals: the match trick (everyone has to speak in the time of the match burning)
summary (one person summarizes, trying to be inclusive of other perspectives)
last year: started from "how to continue?" also in view of material issues (leaving variable building)
this year it could be that people more busy organizing this year won't do it next year, open the question of a sustainable collective organization
how to keep it going?-->the documentation/publication that will follow is a collective concern. obviously it projects towards future (sharing) but stretches as well into the past (continuity with past editions)
tunneling relearn-->outside world
last year there was an idea to try ways to guarantee a continuity (e.g. through constant's "loops" ) throughout the year. is there is still a desire?would it be a very different thing?
how do we present the tracks at the end? Each could use the repository of each track as a starting point to talk about (not what was 'produced', but the trajectory of what was shared/learnt/discovered) Could happen in four parallel groups, not in on e big one - could show something of yours personally, not necessarily what you've been up to in the track. split the track groups in to 4 to make smaller groups? giving everyone space & chance to speak Collective moment at the end. Start discussing this in a wider way at lunch today to get idea of what people would like. one proposal is to use the same format as in the introduction - 4 groups that move round four topics. We will provisionally propose the topics tues morning so people have time to add/change