gammaFri, Sep 4, 2009 Thanks for your comment gamma. I think nobody really lives by this rules; whether you're an artist or not, failure is out of our reach and not controlled by people at all.
I think that you described the precise state of "failure" pattern in human mind, which is of course a neural network. Lately I've been working with neural networks, because of learning physics of condensed matter. It is very useful to avoid being a programmer and programming neural networks as if I am going to make them think. Statistical properties that present bulk evolution in time with a single snapshot are diagrams of attractors, repellents, lasting patterns and such. In the space of such possibilities, scenarios are extremely simple. When you are describing a failure, you are describing that dynamics of one pattern, and it sounds very wise (insightful).
I'm pretty confident to assure that failure can become an aesthetic discourse because it's noticeable in different aspects of life, through different scenarios. The Arts in general just happen to be one of the best tools to communicate abstract ideas and intuition of humanity, they're just the vehicle, not what's inside the vehicle.
I agree with you when you say that mechanics and humans tend to follow chaotic dynamics, but don't really know what you mean by saying that it allows to save energy, could you please elaborate on that?
I was going to say that I usually swear material objects such as screws and mechanics of this planet Earth. If in my behavior, in my mind there are no patterns of Earthly mechanics (screws falling out of their place), I could save personal energy in form of breath and mood. That's the theory.
Some people say THAT is the behavior of a machine, but I disagree. Perhaps, the human fuel is softness, but that does not negate The Borg.
I think that you described the precise state of "failure" pattern in human mind, which is of course a neural network. Lately I've been working with neural networks, because of learning physics of condensed matter. It is very useful to avoid being a programmer and programming neural networks as if I am going to make them think. Statistical properties that present bulk evolution in time with a single snapshot are diagrams of attractors, repellents, lasting patterns and such. In the space of such possibilities, scenarios are extremely simple. When you are describing a failure, you are describing that dynamics of one pattern, and it sounds very wise (insightful).
I'm pretty confident to assure that failure can become an aesthetic discourse because it's noticeable in different aspects of life, through different scenarios. The Arts in general just happen to be one of the best tools to communicate abstract ideas and intuition of humanity, they're just the vehicle, not what's inside the vehicle.
I agree with you when you say that mechanics and humans tend to follow chaotic dynamics, but don't really know what you mean by saying that it allows to save energy, could you please elaborate on that?
I was going to say that I usually swear material objects such as screws and mechanics of this planet Earth. If in my behavior, in my mind there are no patterns of Earthly mechanics (screws falling out of their place), I could save personal energy in form of breath and mood. That's the theory.
Some people say THAT is the behavior of a machine, but I disagree. Perhaps, the human fuel is softness, but that does not negate The Borg.