ie40 image: v4Dyzwhere's a brief overview of his ideas:
in Short, we conceive algorithmically (morphogenesis); we model numerically (rapid prototyping); we build robotically (new tectonics); we inhabit interactively (intelligent space); we telecommunicate instantly (pantopicon); we are informed immersively (liquid architectures); we socialize nonlocally (nonlocal public domain); we evert virtuality (transarchitectures). He has also posited a new "Soft Babylon," a theoretical stance which posits that our digitized architectural palette is causing us to create a wired Situationist city, while we struggle with some of the massive paradigm shifts that our era will and must face. Whilst articulating highly fluent theory, he has practiced, producing beautiful ethereal architectures that flux and shimmer as his algorithms run their designed logics. They are, if anything, characterized by their generative complexities, simultaneously fragmented and fluid. Novak surfs on the Tsunami of technology, pushing the cyber envelope of the profession into the next century.
As we all know, definition, disciplines, institutions have become unstable and inadequate, and everywhere there are reevaluations of the structures by which we comprehend the world. These changes are not formless. They are characterized by the aspects of metamorphic change clustered under the prefix "trans":transmutation, transgression, etc. Everywhere present, this kind of change is most evident in the structures of our quest for knowledge. Novak's work is central to many conceptual cyber notions, and often he gets there first. His current work is to do with "eversion," his word for the casting of architecture in the future will be, in the crazy interstitial worlds where substance and absence are blurred.
--excert by Neil Spiller in 10x10
Something to think about... write some comments and share your views on transarchitecture, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, or anything relevant to future digital technology.
vi ses
3 comments:
I've been thinking of the relationship to artificial intelligence and the 'natural' intelligence...we base a lot the programs and soft/hardware we commonly use today on the scripting of the human mind, and why wouldn't we? we in fact, are the users. Just think of of own human patterns in comparison to a computer in the way we work/design; play/social networking and/or interaction [although those could be separate entities]; memory; though process [ the idea of tracing the electric signals in a mathematical sequence]. [ect..]
Moreover, the critical elements the computer and artificial intelligence currently lacks is emotion and then sense (or is it the other way around). So begs the question. Can we, just as we have previously scripted the elements fore mentioned, formulate the idea of sense and emotion into and virtual script?... one that would mock the natural?
i'm currently looking into cyborg and posthuman theories for my b.arch thesis and it's very interesting that you brought up that question about formulating the idea of sense and emotion into the virtual script to mock the natural. i think that technology is already experimenting with the concept. it didn't take too long for the computer to process a trillion times faster than the human mind. the computer is far more advance that the human. our brains need to rest after awhile, while the computer can go on and on. i'm sure that scientists have been working on giving computers the senses and emotions that humans have. Also if the scripting has the correct code to machine to self-organize and emerge, then these machines will eventually think like a human. there will be a blur between humans and machines. so now the question is can an intelligence create another intelligence more intelligent than itself? will these cybernetic organism wipe out the humans in the same manner that humans have been destroying their creators?
[danny_thai]
'mocking the natural' as i have brought up in the previous comment is a thought that is only possible by the mind that can think not like the mind but like the machine and not like the machine but IN the future. I had a professor once tell me that it would be possible to out think ourselves but, the only way this would be possible would be by accident [in a similar way A.G.Bell invented the telephone, or the way you find something you really shouldn't find in your attic or parents room].
To take ourselves out of the equation of life and look down upon ourselves in a new point of view or perspective.
I feel it is possible to achieve this goal of performing and thinking outside the human scale if we focus on what it is we want out of the future and then leaving an open ended declaration, or in this case 'virtual script', for those to follow for future evolution. Again, in a similar fashion, the way Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence; broad language; future tenses; hope; and common themes for the common "people".
Can we apply this to our machines? Can we write a virtual declaration of independence for the machines to co-exist with the humans? Or would it be more beneficial for us to accept the fact of the inevitable...the future that we have already started to create.
[t.nystrom]
Post a Comment