Practice lead craft research

Practice lead research is a problem of epistemology.

Knitting is creating knowledge with our hands. Craft make knowledge physical.

How do you get knowledge put off craft based practice as research. The answer is rigour.

Rigour has an awareness of previous work, having critical questions of y that work. Hacking and to making and being reflective.

Sonic pi vs overtone with piano phase.

He’s said a lot of interesting things about development, b but the best is that when he used sonic pi, he writes down ideas for tool development. Then he looks at them later. Playing music and composing is thus separated from development.

Keynote guy again

Rubik’s cube solving as performance. Sometimes the process of problem solving is the goal.

The classical theory of problem solving. States based search based problem solving. Problems have a starting state, a set of methods and a goal state. The method operators have pre-conditions, a  transformation method, etc. There is a defined state space.

He is showing the Towers of Hanoi.

The problem state graph for the towers of Hanoi can be an interface for collaborative problem solving. The tree can be computed on the fly.

The graphs give you a shared representation.

To generate the missionaries and cannibals graph you use a two  dimensional graph. This problem is problematic.

Blocks world problem graph has potential layout collisions.

R real world problems. It could be applied to climate change.

Co-solve controls collaborative problem solving. It has a lot of latency. By ticking up the atmosphere. This is some neoliberal bullocks. But it may have performance applications.

Q: what problem are live codes trying to solve?
A: trying to get people to dance, maybe.

Q: should a live coder think of a problem in advance?

A: formulation is difficult.

Approximate programming by Chris Kiefer

Coding by weird interfaces.

Approximate coding. Take a number generator and turn it into code. Any number generator will work. Use gene expression programming. It’s fast but not precise.

What is the value of code as a medium? How precise does code need to be in a live situation? Is the keyboard the best way to write code?

Genetic programming uses a tree representation. Numbers are translated into the tree. Component functions plus arrays of numbers make new code to run.

He’s got jit nodes in SuperCollider and a multislider. Changing the faders changes the synthdef.  You can live code the Synth functions.

A controller could give you your arrays.

There are two levels of live coding. You can create your autonomic functions and the trees created by generating numbers.

You can discover relationships between sound and gesture. The code is kind of incomprehensible but can be out into trees.

Smoothing out parameter space. Small changes can cause static output changes due to non linear ness.

Future work involves smoothing landscapes. He wants some bidirectional feedback.  Could code output make new code?
Can this system do anything precise? Could you find a gradual quick sorry  algorithm?

Q: is there room for genetic processes via evolution?
A:

Q: how duo you compare two trees? How do make the minimal changes on transition?
A: this may be a good way to smooth a transition
Q: diffmatch patching.

What does live coding know by Geoff Cox

Onto-epistemology.

An apparatus is an active productive of the object itself. The programmer produces uncertainty. Subjects and objects co-create.

How is knowledge produced? Disrupt power knowledge regimes. Introducing uncertainty is increasingly important. Code is an integral part of coding practice.

Emergent knowledge

Artistic or practice based research addresses non propositional forms. How does live coding make an argument in itself.

Alternative knowledge or non knowledge. Live coding can shape how and what we know about knowledge?

This challenges goal-oriented research design. Computation contains internal paradoxes as is shown by the halting problem.

Live coding mirrors modern labour production. The speaker refers to Yuill’s article.

Live coding exposes possibilities. It shows the uncertainty of computation.

Q: is there enough reflection of the critical potential? How would Marx critique this?

A: general intellect is absorbed into capitalism.

Live coding and machine listening by Nick Collins

Human hearing can be modeled by a computer.

Live coding can control machine listening or machine listening can be the front end of the language.

This is maybe like gestural coding?

Algoravemic doors a live dynamic remix of a track. Using feature extraction and resynthesis.

Using feature extraction to code the toplapapp.

Speculatively:
Speech recognition
Live code machine listening algorithm
Algorithmic critics
Divergence from the human ear post singularity
Personalised languages of live coding

Machine listening is the future

Q: I didn’t understand the question…
A: yes

Pietro Grossi’s live coding by Giovanni Mori

Pietro Grossing was a proto live coder. He got into electronic music in the 1960’s.

He wrote a program called dcmp that did music in real time. Tau2 was a 12 voice synthesiser which was computer controlled via an alphanumeric terminal doing code in real time. They had a telemetric concert that may predate the hub.

He ported his music languages to the Commodore 64 and adapted them for graphics.
These were uploaded to the internet with FLOSS licences.

Q: was this his day job?
A: he was an independent researcher at first, but then gained institutional support including building a synthesiser and technicians. In the 80’s, he returned to bring independent.

Live code keynote

Steven Tanimoto

Why can’t computing be more like playing an instrument?

Liveness in electrical circuits. How to replace a light switch: safely or write it hot! In computing, you can make the same kind of choices without risk of death.

Live programming: modify a running protean without doing execution.

Fortran was proposed on 1953. Programming was a long task. Make a flowchart, hand write out code, full out a form. Punch cards. Etc etc etc

In 1963 Ivan Sutherland came up with an interactive graphical interface. Visual languages make use of graphics.

Visual languages are discoverable via interactions.

This seeks a closer interaction between program and programmer. Increase visibility. Reduce latency.

Early graphics were non interactive. By the 70’s, diagrams were executable. In the 80’s, the were responsive.

Liveness hierarchy:

1. Informative. Flowchart as description
2. Informative and significant. Executable flowchart
3. Responsive
4. Live

The Data Factory
His live language. All data e elements have a place. Data flows between them.

Is a bit pd-like…

Proposed extension to liveness hierarchy… When does execution respond to programming changes?

Level 1: never
Level 2: when commanded
Level 3; upon any edit
Level 4: immediately and continuously

Level 5: predictive. The computer crashed alternative branches and the use selected the one they want.
Level 6: the computer tries to guess entire program parts

Gestural input for character input is level 5. And also how I am entering this post…

Level 6. Strategically predictive liveness.

Liveness is only useful if the program is executed straight away. Solutions: check syntax  immediately. Secondary executions like just to headphones before out to main speakers.

Q: should truly live programmes learn from and incorporate errors?
A: software engineering is about creating an artefact. Live coding is a performance.

Q: could unit testing be used for predictive aliveness?
A: sound like a good PhD.

Q: music is stateful and development is on some sense stateless.
A: programmers do not think of themselves in terms of performance, but programming involves cognitive states.

Q: doors livened mean the same thing to us as it does to computer science? Or live coding is not live by some definitions.
A: mixing singing and coding does reduce distance between thought and output.

Responding

Yes, respond!

If you just unfriend somebody, they are allowed to believe they are in a consensus where such jokes are allowable. This helps create a climate of hostility against trans people, especially trans women. It’s important to let people know that dehumanising trans people is not considered acceptable by everyone they know.

How you decide to respond is a bit more complex. Has anyone else responded? If someone else has already responded, how you you further engage depends on how the conversation is going. It may be enough to simply click like on their challenge or post that you agree with them. Jumping into the breach, ready for a flame war, may be counter-productive.

Its also necessary to be aware of who is witnessing a conversation. If you take a micro-aggression and blow it up into a flame war, this will be uncomfortable for people who are members of the effected class. It may be best to start gently and take further discussion to private message, to avoid alarming or harming bystanders. Starting publicly is a good idea for a few reasons, one of which is that it shows open solidarity with people effected by prejudice, in a place where they can see it when (or if) they see the comment that caused you to reply.

And, indeed, starting gently can often be the way forward. White fragility is a thing where if you tell a white person they just did or said something racist, their reaction is often hugely out of proportion. This kind of fragility exists in greater or lesser degrees for other kinds of prejudice as well. It may be that the best way to deal with a transphobic joke is to not mention the word ‘transphobia’, but rather say that you think their joke isn’t funny because it’s unfair or mean.

Where you go from there depends on who you are talking to and the circumstances in which they made an ill-advised comment. Your first priority should be solidarity with people effected by the comment. Your next priority is bringing your friend around, so that they see why they said was problematic and why it’s important to respect people different from themselves.

It isn’t easy speaking up and it’s hard to know the right thing to say. Remember that it’s easier for you than it is for somebody who is the target of hateful speech or jokes. This is a skill and it takes practice and it will go badly at least some of the time. Indeed, as we’re all living in a prejudiced world, sometimes it will go completely wrong and you will end up saying something problematic without meaning to and get yelled at by somebody you meant to be an ally to. You should still speak up.

Speaking up won’t work every time, but it will work some of the time. This is how the world changes and becomes better. Minds can and will be changed

Racism and Plunderphonics

A google search for ‘Plunderphonics racist’ returns no relevant results. So here is a rough draft to address that.

Plunderphonics is a tape cutup movement invented by John Oswald. Of course, doing tape cut up pieces from pop culture ephemera and applying tape music techniques to these sources was already occurring. For example State of the Union Message by Ruth Anderson had come out some time previously. As had Bye Bye Butterfly by Pauline Oliveros, who, like Oswald, drew all her material for that from a single song. I think its fair to say that his name recognition and subsequent musical career owes a lot to having got into the charts.

Oswald’s charting record does contain musical merit. Pretender, based on Dolly Parton’s recording of The Great Pretender pulls out hidden depth and vocal timbres in her voice. The choice of material is especially clever, given the rich timbres of her voice. This richness makes her slowed voice a convincing baritone. The program notes suggest that she is secretly a a drag queen (or trans woman), suggesting her femininity is so over the top, it must be self-consciously performative. Indeed, Ms. Parton does not seem to object to this interpretation of her gender presentation. She once entered a drag contest dressed as herself and has repeatedly identified with gay men, as well as been open about the bodily transformations she has undertaken to present her image.

That piece appeared on an earlier EP as well as the one that charted. The one that charted also featured Dab a remix of Michael Jackson’s Bad. the program notes on the Plunderphonics website note that “This is probably the most complicated piece on the album.” And talk about the structure. Officially, it was the copyright violations inherent in this piece that lead to the record eventually being suppressed. Oswald was sued by Jackson and his record label, who forced him to destroy all copies in circulation, never offer the record for sale and never to distribute it in any of the formats that existed at the time. As this was before the web, he has taken advantage of MP3s not being listed to upload the album and its cover image to his website.

However, it was almost certainly the cover image which lead Jackson to sue. The album cover is a modification of the cover of the Bad album, except the iconic image of Jackson in a leather jacket has been manipulated so it shows the jacket slightly open to reveal the torso of a naked white woman.

This album was never on sale. Instead, he sent it to college radio stations across Canada. These stations were influential. Getting a lot of college radio play could get an artist into the charts, which it did for Oswald. Because college radio stations offer a way to get in to the music industry, they used to receive a very high number of promotional recordings – many more than the staff could hope to play on the air or often even listen to and evaluate. This staff was made up of college students who tended to be mostly white men between the age of 18-22. Oswald’s crass joke about Jackson’s race and gender would have appealed to many of these young men, who then took the time to listen to the record and discover it had musical merit.

Although the image was unsubtly racist, there was no trace of that in the audio. Thus, only the DJs saw the image, not the public who came to like his skilfully produced music. Oswald was therefore able to very cannily employ racism as a path to a successful career.

He has cast himself consistently as the victim of corporate bullying, picked on by a superstar out to bankrupt him. However, despite his losing battle with one record company, he has since been commissioned by record companies to do remixes of work in their back catalogues. The lawsuit has hardly destroyed him, but instead, cast him into a victim role which has thus far seemingly prevented any discussion of his own use of structural power against Jackson. Oswald may have been disadvantaged in terms of industry connections, but, as his record cover reminds us, he is a cis white man and therefore, empowered to police the otherness of black people who do not adequately conform to racial and gender stereotypes.

Oswald is not somebody who happens to have done a racist thing. Oswald is someone who owes his entire career to successfully deploying racism. The Plunderphonics cover is not dog whistle racism – it is clearly, indisputably racist. He has never apologised for this and in interviews has doubled down, going so far as to say that Jackson’s body modifications mean that he should have no right to control his own image. He’s framed this in terms of copyright, but the message is clear enough.

As a music tech teacher, Plunderphonics often appears on course syllabuses. Everywhere I’ve taught, the undergrads have included a significant minority of BME/PoC students. Their presence is much rarer doing postgraduate degrees. The number of black composers doing non-pop electronic music is worryingly low and suggest that there are structural issues dissuading people from carrying on in art music. I don’t think covering Oswald helps with this. I also have objections in silently participating in a system where he continues to benefit from his past deployment of racism and transphobia, especially given the absence of any kind of apology.

The success of Plunderphonics is racist and transphobic. I’m going to cover other remix artists instead.