User:Laurier Rochon/notes/proposalv0.2: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
*Nonetheless, they can be complex technically, and conceptually | *Nonetheless, they can be complex technically, and conceptually | ||
*'''Most importantly : the final product is purposefully designed to destroy the agency this same product could have. They are basically created to cancel themselves out in a way or another.''' | *'''Most importantly : the final product is purposefully designed to destroy the agency this same product could have. They are basically created to cancel themselves out in a way or another.''' | ||
== What, how, why == | |||
''So where am I going with this?'' | |||
-> paste notes here very soon | |||
Revision as of 22:10, 2 November 2011
Intro
3 case studies
- 1) Claude Shannon's Ultimate Machine
{{#ev:youtube|KxaWvJ-ziXA}}
- 2) A Tool to Deceive and Slaughter by Caleb Larsen
Every ten minutes the black box pings a server on the internet via the ethernet connection to check if it is for sale on the eBay. If its auction has ended or it has sold, it automatically creates a new auction of itself. If a person buys it on eBay, the current owner is required to send it to the new owner. The new owner must then plug it into ethernet, and the cycle repeats itself.
- 3) The self-referential aptitude test (genius!)
Commonalities
- The are very simple in their "output"
- They do one, and one thing only
- Nonetheless, they can be complex technically, and conceptually
- Most importantly : the final product is purposefully designed to destroy the agency this same product could have. They are basically created to cancel themselves out in a way or another.
What, how, why
So where am I going with this?
-> paste notes here very soon