*the object is just the residue
“In traditional philosophy, you have subjects who interact with objects in some way, for example by perceiving them.

For Deleuze and Guattari, being a subject or an object no longer matters; the relationships are primary--hence the rhizome, which is not nodes plus roots but rather just roots. These relationships are related to "flows." Almost anything can be said to flow, but D&G focus on very particular and everyday flows: money, shit, air, milk.

A D&G machine is composed of smaller machines, each of which sits on a flow and interrupts it. Their examples are the anus, the mouth, and so on. Thus a human body is a classic D&G machine.
But every machine is a part of a system of machines, and between them they integrate every sort of flow. Therefore there can never be a starting point and an ending point for a process: the flow is simply transformed through the interruption, it cannot be said to have a "final cause," and any attempt to limit the flow--for instance, portraying desire as something originating with a subject and ending with an object--is a camouflage operation for the actually unlimited flow. The physicality of machines makes it look like there are actually beginnings and endings in the flow, providing us with an illusion of production, consumption, et cetera.
If we see past this property of machines, we can understand that we are never "molecular" or "nomadic" or whatever: we are only "becoming-molecular," which is a state of constant flux that is far from equilibrium.

I think that this relates substantially to the main thrust of Deleuze and Guattari's work, which is the production of a tenable alternative to the power/knowledge world articulated by Foucault.
Foucault believed that knowledge is always a form of power, but he took it a step further and told us that knowledge can be gained from power, producing it, not preventing it. Through observation, new knowledge is produced. In his view, knowledge is forever connected to power, and often wrote them in this way: power/knowledge. Foucault's theory states that knowledge is always a form of power:
Knowledge linked to power, not only assumes the authority of 'the truth' but has the power to make itself true. All knowledge, once applied in the real world, has effects, and in that sense at least, 'becomes true.' Knowledge, once used to regulate the conduct of others, entails constraint, regulation and the disciplining of practice. Thus, 'There is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time, power relations (Foucault. Discipline and Punishment, London, Tavistock, 1977, p27.)
For him, power acts as a type of relation between people, a complex form of strategy, with the ability to secretly shape another's behavior. As power/knowledge accumulates, it moves toward a lopsided equilibrium.
Thus, for Foucault, a subject is always created and delimited by the knowledge-power dialectic.
But by describing the subject as a system of machines that function as interruptions allows us to see past this dialectic of control, where there is a beginning and and end, and instead focus on the fluidity of flows: where did it come from/where is it going/what are its mutations along the way”.
(All opinions welcome.)
mashed up and edited from http://ask.metafilter.com/59479/What-is-Deleuze-and-Guattaris-abstract-machine & http://www.moyak.com/papers/michel-foucault-power.html

two-minute rule

Try dealing with stuff immediately.

When encountered with something, make a decision on it immediately

David Allen suggests a two-minute rule: if the task can be done in less than two minutes, do it now. If not, add it to your errand list.

excerpt from http://zenhabits.net/once/

Thinking Machine: Frankenstein’s Atlantis

“[Alchemists] promised impossibilities and performed nothing.

The modern masters promise very little. They know that  metals cannot be transmuted, and that the elixir of life is a chimera.

But these philosophers whose hands seems only made to dabble in dirt have indeed performed miracles. They penetrate into the recesses of nature, and show how she works in her hiding places.” –M.Waldman

The tension between the grand, futile masters of imagination – alchemists who seek “chimeras of boundless worth” – versus the wormy, limited ambition of the modern philosopher is one theme that curries the book Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.

Frankenstein himself, before his modern education, was fed on texts by “Cornelius Agrippa”, a ‘scientific quack’ from a prior period. Through lack of thorough scientific method, C.Agrippa made grandly imaginative inductions on the relationships between causes and effects, which I assume are all wrong in effect but interesting in conclusions and when extrapolated.

Frankenstein’s Creature is the resolution of this opposition: born from grand imagination and realized through the accumulated piecemeal discoveries of the modern sciences.

The creature, realized by the pursuit of 'glory’ – that loosely-defined quality that drives men to new horizons in its insatiable pursuit- desired only the opposite: not the glory of discovery, but a stable companion ‘to go live with in the jungles of South America, never to be seen again’. This part, I am unsure of how to regard.*

Frankenstein’s desired to give human life, yet what he made was more than ‘human’. Held back by the grotesqueness of his creation and the stiffness of the term ‘human’ to fully embrace the glory of it, he wrestled with his desire to create and the inability to accept the fruits of this to his death bed.

“From my infancy I was imbued with high hopes and a lofty ambition; but how am I sunk!” he laments on his death bed to Robert Waldon, the ship’s captain.

Both Victor Frankenstein and Robert Waldon are not petty men: they share grandly expansive and metaphysical world views:

“… did you not call this a glorious expedition? and wherefore was it glorious? Not because the way was smooth and placed as a southern sea, but because it was full of dangers and terror, because at every new incident your fortitude was to be called forth and your courage exhibited… For this it was glorious, for this was it an honorable undertaking…

…And now, behold, with the first imagination of danger you shrink away and are content to be handed down as men who had not strength enough to endure cold and peril.

Oh, be men, or be more than men. Be steady to your purposes and firm as a rock. Return as heros who have fought and conquered, and who know not what it is to turn their backs on the foe.”

Thus, these men are not moored to the meat of their existence, but merely tethered to it. Their Being resides in more ephemeral geographies – like the eternal Atlantis –of fables that drive men to seek wider plains, desire deeper explanations and to learn of wider horizons.

However, in this Atlantis (which never really is there), the search itself becomes the act of its creation. Frankenstein’s creature was not a latent property to be “discovered”. It was willed into being by truth yarns spun together (like the alchemist Cornelius Agrippa) with agile zest and paranoia to create new plateaus to rest the imagination on.

 

 

*happiness is only real when shared. -

def ARCHIVE(lennardYear):

Los Angeles, 2010

title = 'The Whale'
description = 'Notes to Myself / A Thinking Machine'

eulogy = """

This is his diary.

\"He is currently an LA-based nomad.

He misses Berlin (where he worked for a summer) and is nostalgic about Singapore (his birth city).

After watching Hackers (aged 10), he wished he was in New York until he got there, where he realized to himself, "oh shit! maybe it was better if i'd left it in my imagination."

Finally, he gave up looking for There as a place. Home is now where-ever he is at that point in time.

What comes first? Truth or beauty. Either way, that gap between fiction and reality is where he plays. "Telling lies with the truth," he adds with a grin.

This is his document, a laboratory, a diary, a voice, a collage. Not about who he was or who he wants to be, but who he is, whatever that may mean or where-ever that may lead.\"

"""

summary = [title, description, eulogy]
print (summary)

print ("""

/             
 ___       ___ (___  ___      
|    |   )|   )|    |___ \   )
|__  |__/ |    |__   __/  \_/ 
                           /  

""")

return lennard

ARCHIVE (2009-2011)

//----------END CHAPTER-----------

Today Dan came by. He is well on with Life, arranging little games to keep himself busy.

Baking pizza, bread and making meals from the basics is a calming process. It slows and distracts the mind. However, am starting to realize that I need alternative inputs other than computational/textual. If not, the mind gets unbalanced and the personal temperament unpleasant.

//Book Thinking Machine, Frankenstein v1.0:

Frankenstein makes one question the definition of "monster". Is the monster so monstrous? The reader takes the role of the ship captain: at the end, torn between what he witnesses - the monster's wrestle to justify his life - and what he was taught by his visual and historical prejudice: the monster is a monster who must be killed.

His creator also goes through the same turmoil. But the monster is right when he says "you are my creator, but I am your master." Certain men of particular fortitude are drawn to such wild abandon to their disciplines that they lose themselves in it.

"if you don't ask, then the answer is already no" -Ben.C

"Pigeon Droppings are damaging to our structures because they are acidic and have other compounds that can dissolve especially things like concrete," said Patricia Martinek, the agency's environmental research manager.

With its large quantities of bacteria and highly corrosive uric acid, pigeon excrement is partly responsible for disasters such as this bridge collapse, as well as the damage of concrete and countless historical stone structures.

According to Venice's department of fine arts and historic monuments, pigeons cause the most damage "to plaster and stucco used on the exterior of buildings and the mortar used in restoration work".

//Artificial Natures

The Night is Never Dark in the the Anthropocene Epoch

"There is a sense of nature that is historical," said David Gissen in his lecture today at the California College of the Arts. By historical, he means it is constructed. For example, a park, as a version of nature, is a reconstruction of a historical perspective of what nature is.

In essence, (nature != natural). Natural is moot. Everything is artifice. Called the anthropocene epoch, this is an age where we as humans have significant agency in the direction of evolution.

But are we in denial of this? Timothy Morton, a professor of English (Literature/Environment) at UC Davis thinks so. "Right now we're zombies. Nature has been dead for 50 years. We need to celebrate it - only then can our history begin again." Think organic food and recyclable paper bags: all tokens of a retro vision far removed from the reality of our ecology.

This epochal change could be traced to two periods in history: both related to booms in human populations and technological agency. The 1800s and the Industrial Revolution, and more recently, 1945 and the Nuclear Bomb. One examples of this post-nature ecology given by Francoise Roche is hermaphrodite polar bears, the result of mutations that allow then to procreate with their diminished numbers.

The Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson frames this nicely. Mars, having been colonized by humans, becomes virgin territory that is the arena for ideological battle: do we remake mars in the image of earth (terraforming) by oxygenating the atmosphere and flooding the barren land? Or do we allow a unique culture on mars to evolve, forcing ourselves to live in the confines of oxygen tanks (aeropany)? It assumes we have the agency to do both: one is a fossilized form of culture, in stasis as we knew we liked it. The other as a form of cultural safari.

I am still halfway through the trilogy (Green Book), and so cannot say further. So I will bookmark the end here. Any thoughts?

//Personal Performance Review

playing in structured freedom

There are 24 hours in a day.
Usually, I start a discipline schedule at 9am everyday.
Projects keep me occupied dinner.

Usually, I can juggle two extended projects at a time.
This means things like "design X/learn Y" etc.
Sometimes, errands take my time.
Errands are things which do not enrich my life, but allow me to live an enriched life.

If my life is impoverised, then errands are pointless.

The day is structured around 2 meals and exercise.
It is essential that these are done leisurely.
It is when the brain breathes and the body takes over.

At night, I allow my mind to roam freely. Sometimes,
when on overdrive, I work at night too. But that means
dinner is especially languid, and a meal might take till 9pm.

By roaming, I mean watching movies or readings books that help
frame my perspective. These are all in the direction of adventure,
the unknown, nature and exploration, guided by science,
logic and computation. People don't usually factor in.

Typically, I am asleep by 2 and am up by 8.
I try not to be too dogmatic about the hours, as long as there
are 6 hours of sleep tucked into me.

Before 9 is time for exercise or meditation. At other times,
it is used to prioritize the activities of the day and reorder current projects.
These are a bit fuzzy now, and notebooks or physical reminders of WIP may help.

Weekly, activities have been cut back
Saturday afternoon/nights are spent out and about.
Friday nights and Sunday are on the fence. It feels wrong to take both off:
too much wastage.
Perhaps Sundays should be free, but also for errands.
This includes laundry,
cleaning the room,
planning a weekly menu,
sorting out the budget
nd whatever else might be important.

Today, I overslept till 11, killing the morning's potential.The last hour
was spent on reviewing budgets and cooking food for the week. Then,
the afternoon was spent on setting up a system for music. (it is quite elegant)

These are halfway between errands and projects.
They help me refine methods for thinking and living.

I think my biggest sink of productivity are small distractions.
If I want to do more, I need to sleep less, or concentrate more.
Another issue is commitment and targets. Often,
I set out to study or learn something, and it fritters away.
Knowledge sunk into the depths of my brain: floating aimlessly.

I think the knowledge acquired needs more structure. It needs an overriding theme.

From now on,
I think all projects need to have some final deliverable.
Their goals should be angled (at this moment) toward portfolio presentation.
Perhaps it might be useful to start each project with a written statement.
This can be loose, and refined as research progresses.

The arbitrary goal right now is Innovation Design Engineering.

(reevaluate this soon.)

//Current Projects:
_1_ Aesthetic Expression: Matte Painting (on hold)
_2_ Coded Relationships: Arduino (whats the goal?)
_3_ Brain Food: Green Mars (dragging on...)

//Coming Projects:
_1_ Collab w/ Yao (portfolio) [framing an argument, matte painting]
_2_ Collab w/ Jan (thesis extension) [Process Experimentation - boolean families, Rendering, Matte Painting]
_3_ AA Facades: concentrate on Arduino. Do not get into representation or too much into gHopper (foundation) [learn how it works with python]
_4_ Ride the Giraffe. Get image done. (identity) [memory stamp, building a history]
_5_ Surf/Swim (body)

//Coming Errands:
_1_ Print physical portfolio (10 copies)
_2_ Frame an arduino project (blindman'sbluff)

the night goes awry, and
all plans for possible magnificence
wilt to bile and duress
consider supper, served
with a movie and blankets
to coddle memories
that would curdle instead

//On UV Radiation, or, why is the sun harmful?

UV causes breaks in bacterial DNA, which in turn cause the bacterial SOS response, which stops many cellular activities and up-regulates DNA repair enzymes. If the UV damage is minimal the cells can recover when they enter more friendly environments, but if the damage is significant they will never reproduce again.

Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) is a sterilization method that uses ultraviolet (UV) light at sufficiently short wavelength to break down microorganisms. It is used in a variety of applications, such as food, air and water purification. UV has been a known mutagen at the cellular level for more than one-hundred years.

//Differences between Flour Types

Wheat flours contain a protein called gluten which, in the presence of water, forms an elastic network throughout the dough. This is the stuff that gives bread doughs their rubbery consistency. The whole point of kneading bread dough, in fact, is to organize the strands of gluten running through the dough into a strong, resilient, interconnected web. It is this web of protein that will entrap the bubbles of CO2 given off by the yeast as it ferments, enabling the dough to rise. Without the gluten, the CO2 would just bubble up to the surface and be lost.

But flour vary greatly in both the quantity and quality of the gluten they contain because different strains of wheat from different regions and different growing seasons have different gluten profiles. There are times when gluten is not your friend; in a cake batter, excess gluten will create a chewy, coarse-grained cake, and in pastry doughs it will produce a tough pie crust. But for bread you want lots of strong gluten to produce a well-risen and well-shaped loaf. This is why there are special flours for special purposes: cake flour, pastry flour, bread flour, etc. 

All-purpose flour is typically a blend of "hard" and "soft" wheats which will perform pretty well in most roles. It usually contains 10-12% gluten. It can be used for bread, but will tend to produce a denser, flatter loaf. Some people will add 1T extra per cup of flour when using all-purpose for bread.

Bread flours have from 12-14 percent protein. They will feel decidedly more elastic while kneading, and will give full, rounded loaves. These flours are made from hard winter wheats from northern states.

Besides the quantity, the quality of the gluten will vary. Some glutens are better at forming the elastic network than others. You can judge this for yourself by making a "gluten ball" from different flours: make a stiff dough using just water and 1/4 c of flour. Knead it until it becomes quite elastic, then continue kneading it between your fingers under a stream of water. This will wash out the starch from the flour and after a few minutes of this you will have a ball of pure gluten. By playing with this ball, stretching and folding it, you will see that some are far more resistant to tearing than others. A good bread flour will enable you to pull the gluten into a thin membrane."

//Territorial Differences: Mayan vs Aztec Civilizations

//book notes

In 'The Social Animal", David Brooks - author and columnist - takes unrelated studies and relates it to the different chapters of the book: e.g. Morality, Learning, etc. It is, at its most ironic, a categorically rational take on the emerging paradigm of emergence, networks and things working within the unconscious, told through the fictional story of two gen-XYZers growing up and falling in love.

This is a "post-google" book that could only have been possible with the malleability that google has given to information.

These studies vacillate between conclusions from psychological, cultural and physiological disciplines. Using this technique, David Brooks builds up each chapter topic as the subjective web that spins together these unrelated studies to a very pointed argument that evades conclusion. But maybe that is the point of his topic as well.

However, I am suspicious that some of these study-chapter topic relationships might be carefully crafted syllogistic fallacies. But that is also the draw of the book: think of it as a fictional story carefully crafted with data instead of characters. It is neither real, nor fake. It is a different form of fiction, halfway between authorship and observation.

Nonetheless the draw is undeniable and the book reads very convincingly. The use of fictional characters to propel the studies forces empathy within the reader, relaxing skepticism and making it a chewably enjoyable read.

// Never Eat Soggy Wheetabix

hiking @ the palisades.

platitude of the day:

"where are we?" she asked

"definitely not there..." he points

Of Jan Major and other Minor things

Gardening Day started with a lesson in biodiversity over breakfast from Jan Major. Biodiversity, in a nutshell, is about balance and equilibrium. I'd like to think of it as dynamic stasis - a boundary of parameters that allow the most number of processes and products to occur. Too much of one thing collapses the possibility of other thiings occuring. "It will re-establish equilibrium," he says. "But that'll take thousands of years...". (He uses words like "resource management" when describing plants.P) 

Correct my ignorant delusions if I am wrong, but perhaps this contributes to what you mean by structures for uncertainty. Too much change in one's lifestyle - which is essentially an ecosystem of social ties, work responsibilities and environments - would upset its dynamic stasis.

I used to be uncomfortable with the idea of stasis: that we don't "progress", and really, we just are. If we don't progress, then why are we alive? What do we strive for? What do you think. Over the past two years, with the help of some excellent professors,  I've slowly turned to the idea that progress is a very hegelian idea: by default, it necessitates an absolute ideal, a judgement on what is better/worse. It is a juridical conception of the world: a false absolute. In opposition, I think of gypsies, carnivals and nomads: the maximum number of difference processes in the smallest confines, a multitude of friction between personalitites, or, dynamic stasis. Its a different mode of thinking and living. I'm not sure how to evaluate my day/life in this framework, except to divide it into loose moments (post dinner, where I drift) and intensifications (10am - 10pm, roughly, where I live by strict stucture and goals).

I like how gardens gain momentum and cadence. They grow even when you're not working on them, and they index the passage of time very explicitly. In our parking-lot/backyard garden, there are snap peas, eight types of tomatoes, corn, rhubarb, strawberries and mint. The watermelons did not survive winter. The tomatoes were doing too well and overcrowding the other plants, so some had to be transplanted to another pot. (Good soil consists of plenty of organic matter and mulch.*)

After gardening, we sat by the firepit in the backyard tiki hut (a bamboo lean-to they made last summer). It was around 8, and the sun had just gone down and the air smelled of the sea. We had Bush Bread, which is a thicker doughier version of bread cooked directly in the ashes of the fire. The bread comes out looking grey and mangey from the ash, but has a smokey rainbow of flavour when you bite into it. (The secret is butter, nuts and fruit bits.*)

Last night, I finished "The Man Who Loved Only Numbers", written by Paul Hoffman about the late mathematician, Paul Erdos. The elegent trick of the book is simple: Hoffman gets you engaged with the neurotic character of Erdos. With this, he sneaks in real theorums and contextualizes them with the different vectors that inform it: the history of some theorums, differences between prime and composites and the personalities behind it (betrand russell, einstein, von newman, fermat, godel all make guest appearances.) In case you never read it, I wanna share some lines and ideas I found enjoyable:

On the Plan for No Plan: "Random methods were effective in routing telephone calls," said Graham, who spent thirty-five years in R&D at AT&T. "... you want to avoid systematic bias. It was better to have no rule and just pick a random link." . 

On Critical Paranoia as applied to Maths: "Mathematics is about finding connections, between specific problems and more general results, and between once concept and another seemingly unrelated concept that really is related." 

On Structural Delusions: "I have a theory... in so many areas of mathematics, it seems natural of appropriate to create your own mathematical world... It can carry over to the rest of your life. There's a tenency to mae up your own rules. A + B is not equal to B + A. Well, everyone knows it is, but suppose it isn't. Now what have you got? Why should you drive on the right when you can drive on the left?"

And with that last line, we're now full circle. "Perhaps what we need to build are structures for safe uncertainty." It is now 930am on a cloudy Sunday. Good bye.

* = words of Jan Major

Roommates of Past and Present

It is my second night in Venice.

Yesterday morning, my roommate, Yao, cried at our final goodbye. I woke up in Dan's apartment and rushed down to see him before he left for work. His reaction shocked me: at both the depth and sincerity of emotion. It made me feel contemplative for a while, considering why he might feel so sad. And strangely, the memories of our times spent together extended way back. Empty days I thought lost were filled with us hanging out- the first time he smoked, me getting drunk, cooking together. The silly stupid stuff. Our chats. Some days he would write and leave messages on my door.At one point, he was dating another girl, Lu, at the time, and she spent a summer living with us. T'was all much ado about nothing, that was also all a part of everything. We had spent so much "nothing" time together that we had grown accustomed and accepting of each other's personal habits. I think that is what I learnt most from Yao: his large emotions, to always support and accept. He was a very generous and patient roommate.

//About the New Roommates:

Lucy cooked indian food for us tonight - chicken curry and rice. The rice was good. I spread it out on the plate like a pancake, and imagined that it might be good if it were cooked to a crisp in this shape and the gravy put over. I think I was subconsciously thinking of Fried Noodles and Hot Gravy. Worked in chats with Jan and Lucy at different times. Lucy has an interesting creative strategy for planning gifts out: a wall of clippings that are re-worked together, over and over. Like a battlemaster's board. Jan is going back to Australia next friday for a few weeks. He showed me pictures of the outback, near where he lived. The desolation of the area is astounding. "Sometimes, I don't hear someone for 5 days," he says casually about his camping trips. I compared the scale of their state park to the island of singapore on googlemaps. We were still significantly smaller. It depressed me and intrigued him.

After dinner we watched The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. Tom, a nordic guy, has a tricked out the living room to become and indoor screening room. His movie selection is pristine: a catalogue so large that makes the sidebar slider look like a pea. All titled with thumbnails and additional information. Beautiful. Tomorrow afternoon will be my first attendance in the Garden Club.

Notes to self

//Work Schedule:

As usual, slower than expected, as usual. Ambition exceeds ability which drags down confidence. Financial issues had to be pushed a day later. Instead, I changed the wheels on the skateboard. I should have stayed on task till the end before switching, however. I doubt that mental break I "thought" I needed was necessary. However, all comments on the portfolio have been made. Having given it time to stew, I was able to cut more fat off of it. In any case, I increased my lunch period to stretch from 12 to 2 because I felt like taking things easier, which Justus and his brother filled today by cooking tacos. Morritz worked a number on the beans and a plate of scrappy leftovers: they almost tasted like a thick chilli stew. I wish I had taken the effort to do some research into cooking with beans prior. My last semester would have been a lot more appetizing.

Morritz has this treasure trove of food knowledge. "All peasant food is delicious... except for XXX" he would say. I try to follow but sometimes lose him because the words he uses brings up too many parallel associations in my mind's eye. I'm not sure if this is good or bad yet. As an experiment, I will try and tune these associations out for the weekend and respond by looking more at his facial expressions.

//Body Notes:

I cycled 12 miles to deliver a book to Bergman for the report we're writing. It felt very freeing to be back on the bike again for such long distances, with a destination and goal in mind. It makes things all very much simpler: the harder one works, the faster one gets there. In the middle of getting there, I didn't notice a pot hole the size of Vietnam on the ground. I braked too late and flipped over the bike. While the bike pirouetted in the air, I managed to launch into a comfortable trajectory to land on my feet without a scratch while the bike clanged behind. Perhaps someone might describe it as "dainty".

Afternoon fitness session was pleasant. Am mentally getting better at running without stopping. I will soon do a complete loop. Next week, I predict. The problem seems to be the journey back: I make up excuses that I am building up to it. Problem is, I think i need a definitive "build up date". My body however, is not reacting to the chinups and pushups. I think I need to change it to daily morning anaerobic exercises, and cardiovascular ones in the evening. Or find an alternative. The tedium of situps and pushups do not appeal to me. It is a pity not to exercise at the beach, however. The breeze is salty fresh and the sun feels lighter on the skin. It smells and feels a lot better, running in Venice than in Downtown.

June 4, 2011. Midnight

//good self-learning resources

http://mitworld.mit.edu/
http://www.khanacademy.org/

//note to self:

Hellicarandlewis, a new-media duo focused on play, post their source codes on GitHub. Good place to deconstruct examples.

//from CreatorsProject

TechnoMysticism, this is hypnotically beautiful.
http://www.thecreatorsproject.com/blog/a-poetic-digital-theater-performance