[OFF SITE] VIENNA 2016
- Somewhere in 2013 my website was hacked and used as a relay for distributing spam mails. As a reaction to this, I decided to stop publishing for at least one year.
Online content, like every other published content, seems to be public property for knowledge holders of technology of appropriation. Once you get access, the appropriation of authorship is only a matter of hiding traces.
To create a particular opinion - or pattern, any data can be recontextualized with any other data. In this sense, algorithms can be defined as operations with open ends. The input and output can be restricted to a certain format, but there is no restriction how the output is used - or not.
Today, meta processes that observe child processes for unusual patterns are used to prevent the Halting problem. The modern computer can be seen as the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. The user must be seen as a necessary member to complete the set - in contradiction of its own definition.
However if a process produces data that is somehow used by other processes, the context gets much more complex. Interrelation is only readable if the pairing nodes are known (see above: this is where the hiding starts).
Following this circle of thought, the current buzzword Big Data reveals its much bigger counterpart: Unused Data.
Among the fastest algorihtms today are indexing, sorting and searching methods. A huge industry exists only to determine the distinction of referenced and unreferenced data. However, "reference" is a misleading term, because data is always the representation of digital memory.
In this sense, talking about technology reveals the tautology of a meta language that is used to describe the supposed meaning of data, which can be anything but unreferenced.
Therefore the product of the future will be the "Verdacht" (under suspicion) machine. An automation that is able to indicate where a distinction might be necessary - or not. According to the Laws Of Form suspicion will be the pre indicator for the distinction of what we know and what we don't know. The fetish of commodity becomes the fetish of distinguishability, that is always, and can only be indistinguishable memory. (Frank Eickhoff, Berlin, 2014)