taking art back.

unfortunately, i am too tired at the moment to read the manifesto all the way through, as i need to sleep soon…. i plan on copying it and pasting it to the site.

while their ideals may differ from our own on the way to deal with this kind of recuperation, its interesting to see the same influences at work in a different medium with different ideals. also, some influences that i did not personally know about.

somehow, i assume chris_v already knows about the Motherfuckers.

however, we must note that this seems to be a much larger group than the base of illop.com… and as such it is easier for them to organize such events.

perhaps we should contact them?

…nah.

your cultural influence has expanded!

—-

p.s. this was totally ripped off from metafilter.

p.p.s. a metafilter commenter pointed to the near immediate commodification of their dissent… which i think is particularly hilarious.

In broad terms, Debord’s theories attempted to account for the spiritually debilitating modernisation of both the private and public spheres of everyday life by economic forces during the post-WW2 modernisation of Europe. He rejected as the twin faces of the same problem both capitalism of the West and the statism of the Eastern bloc. Alienation, Debord postulated, could be accounted for by the invasive forces of the ‘spectacle’ – “a social relation between people that is mediated by images”.

I found these excerpts from something called “Alice in Wonderland or Who is Guy Debord?” on Youtube. “Who is Guy Debord?” you might ask? Luckily there’s a new fangled interwebs to look it up on: Guy Debord according to Wikipedia.

Oh you don’t want to click a link? Too much trouble? Here’s an excerpt. This paragraph is pro. And cherry.

He also promoted detournement which is basically hijacking cultural materials and slapping them together in new and interesting ways, regardless of ‘ownership’ and ‘intellectual property’, since those concepts are just capitalist conceits anyway. These videos are an example of that. Enjoy.

for the first time, complete, in easy to read (and copy) html

so earlier today, i was visiting the anti-advertising agency website, i found this video and a link to its originating site:

the site this video originated from was none other than GOOD Magazine. after a quick overview of their website, i found a bitchin article about the history of culture jamming. not only is this article smart and thorough, but they attribute the coining of the term ‘culture jamming’ to Negativland, which is something i did not know about an already awesome band. its a very good look at the history of analog hacktivism.

while it is cool enough that this is an interesting website, you can also sign up for a years subscription of this magazine, and all the money you pay goes to directly to one of twelve different charity organizations, of which you choose to give your subscription money to. many popular and good ones like UNICEF, but also to my surprise: Creative Commons. i am proud thats now considered a worthy charity. because it really fucking is damn it. i mean damn, Negativland helped write one of the commons licenses.

at first, i was a little skeptical of how they could afford to do this without charging for shipping, so i did a little snooping around the site. on their contact page, there were the standard forms for shooting off an email, but there was something more personal and little less often used on the site: a phone number. after hesitating a moment, i called the number and was soon talking to a GOOD magazine representative.
apparently, the production cost of the magazine is covered by the advertising that is displayed in the magazine. from what i understand (which is not much.), most magazines ship with ‘direct mail’ advertisements in them. you know, the shitty little leaflets inside a magazine, telling you to subscribe. you always throw them away. well, instead of paying for those, they use that cost to cover the shipping so they can donate your money directly, without any skimmed off the top.

also, as i was skimming through the info on their website, i found this on their terms page, which also pleased me:

4. GOOD’s CREATIVE COMMONS LICENSE.

Unless otherwise noted on this site, all content created, authored, posted, or offered by GOOD on the Service is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License. You can read more about the Creative Commons, and the details of our license, at this link: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/.

after searching these guys, i couldnt find any proof whether or not they were creative commons promoters or not.

but in the end, i still wanna know, why cant all just be Yes Men?

Editors Note: the opinions of illogical operation staff members do not reflect the parent company, its subsidiaries, or its stockholders. illogical operation is a proud user of Libre Commons.

oh, and i like the ratatat soundtrack.

motherfuckingshit.

really, it is so wrong for so many reasons, not just the paint job.

also, if you hadnt heard, the u.s. government is trying to quash the eff’s suit against at&t for illegally handing over what could be millions of tapped phone conversations over to the nsa.

they are using the excuse that the entire operation is a ‘state secret.’

man, i remember when i was a kid i learned that keeping secrets is something stupid to do.

so why does our government do so damn much of it.

i want to open source politics.

—-

do i just have interest in what the nsa is doing because they live next door?

…while a site near Yakima, Washington (46.681965° N 120.357810° W) intercepts traffic in the western U.S.

another triumph for guerilla science.

here are instructions on how to get started on confusing the bitches of the local populace with a backpack full of led throwies.

1. how to make an led throwie
2. how to make a night writer that utilizes led throwies

EDIT:

on another note about led’s, a hacker in canada apparently decided to let the truth slip about the p.m.