 |
 |
Andrew Wilson wrote: > there must > be more fun and enlightening things to invent with locative media (if > that's what it's called and whatever it is. Is there a definition of > that phrase anywhere?) than "watch out, they're behind you!" I like Ed Mac Gillavry's <www.webmapper.net> definition: "an initiative to collectively create models of real-world locations online, that people can then access and use to virtually annotate locations in space. The value of the annotations is determined by physical and social proximity (expressed in distance and “degrees of separation”). Thus, the information is not only filtered based on proximity, but also ranked according to the trust one person has in another person through social networks" but that may be a bit a bit of a functional definition... too much web cartography (i guess in that sense responding with yasir's call) and not enough art. According to wikipedia: "The locative case corresponds vaguely to the preposition "in", "at", or "by" of English and indicates a final location of action or a time of the action." <en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locative_case> But regarding "more fun and enlightening things to invent with locative media... than "watch out, they're behind you!""... i don't mean to suggest that vigilance re: surveillance shouldn't be a foremost concern in locative work, but rather... I'd propose that _it's already there, at the core of what's motivated much of the work _ so much so, in fact, that it almost goes without saying... (not sure if anyone's with me here...) If we follow Ed's definition from above... building a "accessible" maps where location is, for example, measured by degrees of trust... that's a perilous path no doubt (Friendster ---> Total Information Awareness) but it's also an activist project towards constructing what i reckon (as I suggested in my first post to) amounts to a new public realm, accessed by the most "accessible" communications technology in history, the mobile phone... Of the people I've met who're making mapping hacks for mobile devices, they're doing so because they're feel like they want to, or _need to_ do something. The artists, hackers, activists, whatever[ists]... that I am thinking of (such a large proportion of whom are from the UK), have a profound concern & commitment to public life... Is it any coincidence that in the UK (where CCTV is most prevalent) technological SURVEILLANCE is just a fact of everyday life... It's not some theory about "normative biopower" (although that applies in spades too)... IT JUST _IS_! M