Manovich 2 questions

1. Paragraph 5: The "non-transparency of the code" idea confuses me. Actually, the whole paragraph confuses me. Is cultural communication refering to the interface?

2. Paragraph 6: The cut and paste is "blind" to the traditional distinction between spatial and temporal media, scale and media. I don't understand what "renders insignificant distiction/blind" means in the "cut and paste" operation. What is a "temporal composition?"

Questions from Manovich reading

numero uno.
If digital works of art are capable of being altered depending on the interface they are presented in, does this lack of formal integrity compromise their validity as works of art? By which I mean, if the Mona Lisa could be presented in multiple formats, and thus altered in form, would it still be as appreciated?

numero dos.
In the case of the AL approach in computer programming, the artist/programmer gives the computer certain guidelines or rules, by which the computer generates media data. Doesn't this process create an unacceptable level of detachment between the artist and the work? Is there anything to be appreciated about an "artist" who chooses the most hands-off approach possible: devising the guidelines and leaving the work (the real art-making) up to a machine? To illustrate: if DaVinci had given an apprentice certain rules or guidelines, and set him to work within them, are we really to give credit to DaVinci for what transpires, and what results?

The Interface

Not as an official question but as a very unofficial one, "Did anyone else love the reference to Matthew Barney and if so did anyone else start to listen to Bjork immediately after reading the first paragraph of the chapter?" because that is exactly what I did.

Anyway down to the questions:

1. Does the creation of the interface and therefore the connection that the human-computer interface has to the "information" society vs. the "industrial" society by combinding "work" and "leisure" applications in one space lead to a greater divide between these two groups of society?

2. If the content an artist has created within a certain interface is then filtered through a different interface does the content retain it's value as art? If not does this therefore diminsh the validity of the piece as a work of art?

the interface.

two questions;
1. "in society, work and leisure activities... increasingly involve computer use..." at what point will work &play &all other ways in which we spend our time merge into being completely computer-dependent?
2. because artwork created digitally depends so much on the program in which it is created, which can itself be considered a work of art, is it a stretch to call the artwork a collaboration piece between "artist/s" &program designer/s?

The Interface.

This article explains about the teachology and that it has permeated in modern society.
It has made changes in leisure as in work

so my questions are


1. The articles says that the technology has impacted on people's leiusre, then how does new digital technology impact on art in general? Would it substitute the current art museums if arts can be easily seen on websites? or would it bring any change in the current art forms? or would the make any new forms of art?

2. Although the technology enables people to communicate and obtain datas abroad, how would it enable "most" of the people to use the technology. There can be a language barrier preventing people from using other countries' interface. Then should all the interfaces be made with graphic so people can access the proper data regardless of the language barrier? Would it be possible?

The Interface!

Manovich talks about how technology has impacted both work and leisure activities of the information society. The socialist within me couldn't resist thinking of how this contributes to class divisions. What do people who can't afford computers do? Most public libraries allow anyone with a library card to use a computer for free, but there are limitations to this. For example, I wouldn't want to look at porn or do my online banking on a public computer. Also, the library in my area only allows people to use a computer for 30 minutes at a time (if there's a line). Furthermore, so many activities I do on the computer involve reading. It would be difficult to use a search engine without being able to spell (although google does have a built-in spell check...).

So, my first question is this: Does technology help to separate rich people from poor people? In other words, are rich people getting richer and poor people getting poorer, because of the internet (and other technology)? Or, has this division always been there... because even before computers, poorer people didn't have access to the same kinds of entertainment as richer people.

My second question is this: Is the internet still "a filter for all culture" for people who don't own a computer? I mean, technology does impact advertising (and anyone can see a billboard)... but how does the interface affect society in the real world (meatspace?)?

wow. long post. sorry about that.

2 questions about The Interface

I had a lot more questions concerning how the interface relates to the world but I came down to these two but there's a lot of follow up questions that I'll not bore you with.

1. If "all culture, past and present, came to be filtered through a computer", is it merely the relationship or the interface between the user and the computer that filters it or is it literally the computer the "medium" that ultimately filters it like languages/words argued by Whorf and Derrida?

2. The paper argues that "the interface imposes its own logic on media"; however, can't we say that the people such as computer programmers and artist who makes the logic and makes operations as the 'cut and paste' operation is imposing their own logics and 'models of the world' to the user?

I thought some of the arguments and debate Manovich talked about relates a lot with just art in general such as the subject of concept-interface and concept-form he talked about. Interesting paper.