Lutz Dammbeck’s Das Netz

[Sweejak]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Review – The Dark Side : Das Netz : ein Film von Lutz Dammbeck <br>Lutz Dammbeck’s Das Netz is a highly commendable and intriguing work of research, drawing from Internet, archival and interview sources, in which we are taken on a journey to examine early Internet history and its less savory or more hedonistic, cultish and covert government protected aspects. Themes generally underexplored in the Net’s military, artistic and industry lineage are brought to life in Das Netz. It is a deeply thought-provoking documentary deftly weaving an abundance of esoteric information into numerous pernicious subplots for a moving picture of the most innovative largely American, if not Californian and “white privileged maleâ€

[Qutb]

Sweejak, this is very interesting. Do you have a link to that? <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://newmediafix.net/daily/?p=152">newmediafix.net/daily/?p=152</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.othercinema.com/otherzine/?issueid=14&articleid=35">www.othercinema.com/other...ticleid=35</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br>There is another review here:<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.popmatters.com/film/reviews/n/net-2004-dvd.shtml">www.popmatters.com/film/r...-dvd.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>A hypnotic meditation on Kaczynski by German documentarist Lutz Dammbeck, The Net parses some of Kaczynski's critiques, particularly those directed at the mass media, but is just as much about the curious, unwritten prohibition on discussing the manifesto's contents. Time and again as Dammbeck travels hither and yon talking to a range of people -- mathematicians, software designers, computer historians -- they clam up whenever Kaczynski is mentioned. He's a dangerous criminal, we're reminded, a murderer whose opinion is therefore of no consequence.<br><br>Dammbeck is intrigued by this reluctance to talk about Kaczynski's ideas. At first he seems a little off his nut: "All this is part of a system," he says in voiceover, practically gouging the word "system" into his notes, "that turns every attack and disruption into an energy source with which to perfect itself." Such elaborate reasoning seems excessive: after all, the Unabomber committed his atrocities in part to draw attention to his own writings, so discussing them could seem to some like an implicit justification of his acts.<br><br>But later, a montage of media coverage following Kaczynski's arrest gives the impression that we are in fact dealing with just such a system.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The film is available on Netflix, is well worth viewing. The question it leaves me with is .... Why is the internet still up? Why are they using it 'only' for spying on us? What are they planning to eventually use it for? And lastly, am I just paranoid? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sweejak@rigorousintuition>Sweejak</A> at: 5/27/06 9:52 am<br></i>

[LoganSquare]

<br>Alston Chase has a terrific book on Kaczynski, Harvard and the Unabomber. He discusses Henry Murray's LSD mind-control experiments on Kaczynski and others (some of whom also suffered breakdowns) and discusses the changes in educational philosophy occuring at the time that made such experiments possible. (He is himself a Harvard grad and prof. of philosophy who gave up an academic career to escape to Paradise Valley, Montana.) Those experiments were glossed over and not brought in as evidence in Kaczynski's trial. <br><br>The book is filled with interesting facts such as that Kaczynski's cabin design was based on Thoreau's. And it contains photos of his strange and finely crafted devices.<br><br>Thanks for the lead, Sweejak.<br> <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

Links from the film's homepage:<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.t-h-e-n-e-t.com/start_flash.htm">www.t-h-e-n-e-t.com/start_flash.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>go to "links" then "Defense"<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.unsaccodicanapa.com/htmlpages/globalcorporatepower.html">www.unsaccodicanapa.com/h...power.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>#Anchor-Global-49575 (Tavistock)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/2003/2-mental.htm">www.crossroad.to/articles...mental.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> (mind control, Tavistock)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.newtotalitarians.com/WhatIsSensitivityTraining.html">www.newtotalitarians.com/...ining.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <br>(Lewin, Rees, mind control)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.econcrisis.homestead.com/BritishPsychiatry.html">www.econcrisis.homestead....iatry.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> (MKULTRA)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.leary.com/fbifiles/">www.leary.com/fbifiles/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> (Leary/LSD/FBI)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.transhumanism.com/">www.transhumanism.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.cs.ucla.edu/csd/textpages/overview/history_text.html">www.cs.ucla.edu/csd/textp..._text.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br>(Sage, RAND, computing)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://"></a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> www.parascope.com<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.darpa.mil/">www.darpa.mil/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://ftp.arpa.mil/">ftp.arpa.mil/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.defenselink.mil/">www.defenselink.mil/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.attac.org/indexfla.htm">www.attac.org/indexfla.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> (ATTAC)<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.attac.de/index.php">www.attac.de/index.php</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> (ATTAC) <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sweejak@rigorousintuition>Sweejak</A> at: 5/27/06 11:32 am<br></i>

[Sweejak]

Audio file. This is in the extras menu on the DVD, an interview with Paul Garrin.<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.h-files.hraunfjord.org/Kolokol/PaulGarrin.mov">www.h-files.hraunfjord.or...Garrin.mov</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

Article.<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.altx.com/ebr/reviews/rev9/r9bri.htm">www.altx.com/ebr/reviews/rev9/r9bri.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Snip:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Hayles begins the historical tale of disembodiment with the Macy Conferences on Cybernetics, a series of post-WWII interdisciplinary meetings joined by leading mathematicians, engineers, psychologists, and others associated with the emerging and yet to be defined field. Hayles's purpose is not a detailed historical account of the conference, as Steve Heims has already given us, so much as a selective examination of how assumptions, often rooted in disciplinary power, and more subtly in gender, disembody the concept of information, and how it came to center a "constellation" of concepts and research trajectories around homeostasis: those environmental interactions that keep an entity stable, drawing a skin around a kind of artificial body. Conceptually, homeostasis permits a body-erasing comparison between human and machine because it focuses on identity conservation rather than identity itself. Human and machine are "black-boxed," their specific structure erased, excluded from the equation, in order to measure and compare input/output relations across material contexts. On the model of the famous Turing Test, if a machine responds to input the same way that a human does, other differences, specifically differences in embodiment, fade into irrelevancies<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

I found this article on Bruce Sterling's blog<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The race began innocently enough with the notion of creating directories of online destinations, such as the early incarnations of Yahoo. Then came AltaVista, where one could search using an inverted database of the content of the whole Web. Then came Google, which added page rank algorithms ....<br><br>... Then came the blogs, which varied greatly in terms of quality and importance. This lead to Meta-blogs such as Boing Boing, run by identified humans, which served to aggregate blogs. In all of these formulations, real people were still in charge. An individual or individuals were presenting a personality and taking responsibility.<br><br>... It was still clear, in all such designs, that the Web was made of people, and that ultimately value always came from connecting with real humans....<br><br>In the last year or two the trend has been to remove the scent of people, so as to come as close as possible to simulating the appearance of content emerging out of the Web as if it were speaking to us as a supernatural oracle. This is where the use of the Internet crosses the line into delusion.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The beauty of the Internet is that it connects people. The value is in the other people. If we start to believe the Internet itself is an entity that has something to say, we're devaluing those people and making ourselves into idiots.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>It's safer to be the aggregator of the collective. You get to include all sorts of material without committing to anything. You can be superficially interesting without having to worry about the possibility of being wrong.<br><br>Except when intelligent thought really matters. In that case the average idea can be quite wrong, and only the best ideas have lasting value. Science is like that. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The collective isn't always stupid. In some special cases the collective can be brilliant....<br><br>... Each student guesses how many beans there are. While the guesses vary widely, the average is usually accurate to an uncanny degree.<br><br>... It was long ago adapted to futurism, where it was known as the Delphi technique. The phenomenon is real, and immensely useful.<br><br>... But it is not infinitely useful. The collective can be stupid, too. Witness tulip crazes and stock bubbles. Hysteria over fictitious satanic cult child abductions. [Dont get me started!] Y2K mania...<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The rest here:<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge183.html">www.edge.org/documents/ar...ge183.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>