this article has been floating around /.
about ‘how to steal an election’ in the electronic era.
definitely worth a read.
in video veritas
technical images and linear text
something weird…
right now, i am sitting in class behind an individual whom i do not know.
however, i can see his computer monitor from here – as can the individual behind me see mine – and i can see that he has someone on his MSN list who is also on mine.
thus, my being-in-the-world is linked to his being – which resides corporeally two feet in front of me – by an ephemeral series of decentred connections over 2.4ghz radio signal and fiber-optic cable, through dozens of interchained networks and one person’s online archive (our common contact’s list of ‘friends’). the real paradox here is that when we think about it, this connection is one which is essentially more surprising, in that it brings us ‘closer’ together than our actual physical proximity. i am closer to this person in an electronic, intangible sense, mediated by surveillance, than i am to him, two feet away from me, because i would never speak a word to him.
because he’s an idiot.
working rules!
so, i’m at work. and despite the title of this post and our reading of this week, working does not, in fact, rule. but i’m reading this article and i’m going to jot down some comments informally whilst i do so. this blog will be my pharmakon.
one interesting aspect of CCTV surveillance, for example, is that by virtue of the camera’s position – high up, generally – and the operator’s perspective, even relatively innocuous-seeming acts, like wearing some sort of headgear or a hood, become disproportionately suspicious. a co-present observer would not generally be hindered in recognizing a person’s face by a baseball cap or even a hooded sweater; to the deaf CCTV observer hanging from the ceiling, however, it becomes an intrinsically suspicious effort to conceal one’s identity.
deconstructing surveillance
I like this paragraph, from this week’s readings. It features that grand signal word – supplement! That’s my cue to pull out my worn old copy of de la grammatologie and give the text a wee deconstructive shakedown. Let’s see what falls out.
“CCTV catches criminals. It spots crimes, identifies lawbreakers and helps convict the guilty. The spread of this technology means that more town centres, shopping precincts, business centres and car parks around the country will become no-go areas for the criminal…. CCTV is a wonderful technological supplement to the police… One police officer in Liverpool likened the 20-camera system as having 20 officers on duty 20 hours a day, constantly taking notes.” (Clive Norris, 255)
Of control; spectacular, disciplinary and panoptic
Deleuze’s ‘postscript’ raises some interesting questions about the contemporary validity of the kind of disciplinary, panoptic model of social control outlined in Foucault’s Discipline and Punish. Deleuze posits that these kinds of disciplinary societies, having succeeded the ‘societies of sovereignty’ in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, are now undergoing a transformation into what he calls ‘societies of control’ (3). The substance of this claim is not immediately obvious. If anything, contemporary society in the West seems less overtly ‘controlled’ than in previous centuries. Sovereignty and discipline are quite clearly different, to be sure; their respective ends, to “tax rather than to organize production, to rule on death rather than to administer life” (3) are quite clearly distinguishable. Deleuze’s ‘society of control,’ however, seems less distinct from its predecessor. Both theoretical forms of society involve the interaction of a series of disciplinary institutions, both state and non-state, observing and cataloguing individual behaviour for the purposes of social administration.
for those, who like me…
…wondered what foucault meant by calling the Panopticon a “Columbus’s egg in the order of politics,” perhaps this story will be somewhat illuminating.
obscure though it may be, it’s a quite lovely little allusion. in the highly apocryphal tale, Columbus was getting somewhat piqued at the gentlemen who were proposing that “anyone” could have done what he did; ie, discover a new continent. thus, he played his little game with the egg. none of the gentleman could do what he asked of them – to make the egg stand on its end – and they proclaimed it impossible. whereupon columbus cracked that old egg just a little bit on the skinny end and made it stand upright. “big deal!” you, the exceedingly hypothetical reader, proclaim.
concerning the ‘clickprint’
so, apparently, just by tracking one’s browsing habits – literally, such basic data as how long you spend on the average site, how many sites you visit in the average browsing session – a virtual ‘clickprint’ can be created that will be matched against your online persona (‘digital body,’ perhaps) to confirm your identity.
now, not only can you be tracked via the information that you actually give out in forms et cetera, you can be tracked and monitored by even your most basic computing habits.
of course, the site says that this will be mainly used for credit card security, and the like. but still – it’s frightening if you’re a disillusioned, paranoid individual like myself.
taxonomy.
- absurdism
- art
- cinema
- conspiracy theories
- culture
- Deleuze
- dogmatism
- entries for grading
- food
- foucault
- history
- Ideas
- internet
- Latour
- marx
- meta-review
- news
- obscure digressions
- panopticism
- philosophy
- photography
- police state
- politics
- pope!
- propaganda
- psychoanalysis
- religion
- research
- science
- snippets
- surveillance
- technology
- temporal/spatial compression
- totalitarianism
- video