I wouldn't require much of a point, nor do I take these performatives among colonial medium seriously, in terms of finished outcome. This is a raw form, ongoing process...and the context has chang.ed from polemic to art...to cultural memory... Until there is a communicative, of informatic production, the production isn't to desire or establish some focus, nor is the writing some assertion with conviction. Rather there's are these splitings among the opposites, among the embrace of contradictions and collapse, of a raw material that works into the informatic language, of dynamic arrangement. Still, there is that experience, again with Hustle Bones and Espresso Machiato. Among these are notions that I like to highlight and connect with my art projects...
I am also contemplating still, the use of digitized archives, that still are not monetizing certain writings, and I take issue with that. I too, take issue with the fact that digitized media that has monetized these works aims at preventing works from being used in newer ways, of newer institutional design. I do think these matters will reconcile, eventually, like the way Napster models improved and figured out a way to keep up with the expected payouts so people can supply what they need for everyday life. YouTube has done this as well, including automation that discovers songs used with payouts to artists. We do need a digitized book machine, that simply provides the pdf or note version of any book, to be used in a newer form of informatic writing, which still ensuring there is a payout. The existing status quo doesn't want to meet that need, and like the newer models of the turn of the millennium, no one actually gets off their ass until they have too...like Napster bypassing industry, and I think that's where the book model is now. For me, if there is something adding value, I'll purchase the kindle version, but this really is an absurdity. Amazon, for example, will not allow pdf versions of the item you paid for, and as for modeling the material, it will not happen, even though the technology is there to develop the dynamic form of a work, among newer institution and newer industry. It's genuinely annoying, but the youth are a bit on my ass I think in terms of keeping up with the times, and I am sounding like the old asshole at university who forewarned of the dangers of WIKI, and yet the new technology was useful and we could cross-check the information ourselves...So yeah, I'm now playing with a book archive. I need pdfs, not proprietary horseshit that wants to prevent me from doing what I do, that keeps up with the times...It's like owning a car and some jackass from old outdated convention demands a horse be attached tot he new and improved horse carriage...all the while we are explaining...no asshole, this is a car....it has a newer capacity....same with a book...no asshole this is not the final form of information...there is the informatic use, of a value added, of which we need the form of the item we purchase to model the informatic...We purchased it...and yet still even afterwards the use is restrictive to the point to negating the emerging new technology....So like the WIKI matter, YouTube, Napster, Spotify, etc... I am going to shift gears, use the newer system and just let the old drab and dust catch up afterwards...and they do! We do need a monetized book system with materials that are easily available in the form that we need. I think too, like spotify, working with advertizing, or even newer library arrangements, where downloads are covered by allotted funding, etc...and I'm not really sure the way to go, but I think there is this paranoia about the lost of book purchases, like the lost of cd purchases, and yet, if it is simply a mainstreamed model with subscriptions and advertising, and allotted funding, there can be the win-win. For now, it is a win-lose, and I've got to move on...matters, as I have noted of before, will inevitably catch up....It's frustrating. I don't like participating in this way at all. However, again, as has been consistent, no one catches up unless they have to...and I'm tired of the book industry sitting on their ass with this one. Stop restricting access in the way that prohibits the development of these newer informatic forms. We paid for the book, and it's absurd that I can pay for the digital book and not receive a pdf, and yet, if I buy the physical book, scan it in, I will then have the pdf....I paid, give me the damn pdf.
I just pulled from an archive a book I purchased on Amazon, in the digitized version I need...so in that sense, I'm paying for the book. Now our youth have made clear that secondary book markets, which I get a lot of my books from do not provide anything to the authors....which to me is why the streaming book model would be so much better even for intellectual property. If you authored the book...it is nicer to have a model that encourages mass use and always pays out for the work you published vs losing sales on a secondary market. Again, I'm annoyed by this. And the highlight of the secondary was made to me, because yes, a lot of books I do get from thrift sites...and yes I would like to pull the digital version from an archive for modeling...and yet, none of the money goes to the author...and yet, there is a streaming model that could finally address that outcome for authors. Additionally, access to the information...it's much better under streaming models and there can even be programs to ensure all have access....and that is an incredibly important matter in relation to democratic design...so I am all in on the archive...Otherwise I'm that old prude again warning of the dangers of WIKI and now we use wiki all the time. And like a secondary market for books, the archive does seem legal, in that these are sources like a thrift book store...only digitize and available for all, and there are subscription services as well...Still, what I have made clear and seems as if the youth concur, is that there needs to be an improvement to the model so there is a payout to the author, so they can have a sustainable living, in relation to the fruits of their labor, which as I discussed even the status quo model does a shit job of it, considering what happens on the secondary market.
