The software heist of the century, or a modern art masterpiece? - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Ridge;31929263]There is no proof there is anything on that hard drive. It's not even plugged in. It could be empty, like he stopped on the way to the museum at WalMart and bought one.[/QUOTE] oh my god he's a fraud it's not plugged in

[QUOTE=Ridge;31929263]There is no proof there is anything on that hard drive. It's not even plugged in. It could be empty, like he stopped on the way to the museum at WalMart and bought one.[/QUOTE] I find that more interesting and artistically significant. Here's a device, a piece of ordinary technology. From the exterior, there's nothing special about it at all. But the placard claims that it contains an incredible amount of data, and thanks to its pirated status is worth a fortune in lawsuits and compensation. It is on this knowledge alone that the object goes from a harmless piece of tech to an accessory to crime on a massive scale. But externally, and functionally, there is no difference. The machine itself is innocent, it simply takes data that is given to it. But unlike, say, a knife claimed to have been used as a murder weapon, its illicit state persists. A knife is cleaned, and becomes nothing more than a tool. Whether or not it was really used in a crime doesn't change how it behaves now. But a hard drive, which stores data, does not become innocent when removed from its host machine. The crime remains on the disk. And where people might examine a murder weapon with a curious detachment- after all, its state as an instrument of violence was ephemeral, transitory- the hard drive is seen as permanently an instrument of piracy and illegality. It's more than a tool which is used and discarded and remains a tool, it carries the illegality with it. But that, of course, hinges on there being anything on the disk. Maybe there is. Maybe there isn't. No way to know. I am not an art person, but there's a lot in this exhibit worth thinking about, and that constitutes art. Dismissing it as 'just a hard drive' would be like dismissing literature as 'just stories'- it's superficial and not even taking a moment to think about what meaning there might be. Sometimes the most meaningful insights come from simply thinking about the world around us, and art is designed to inspire that kind of thought.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31929263]There is no proof there is anything on that hard drive. It's not even plugged in. It could be empty, like he stopped on the way to the museum at WalMart and bought one.[/QUOTE] that doesn't really change anything though [editline]24th August 2011[/editline] also cool post guy above me

This wasn't posted before, but the article said 'terrabyte' Is that some kind of earth memory?

Now all you have to do is go tape a few neodymium magnets to it. Vapor art!

[QUOTE=TheHydra;31927320]i used it as a part of an intentional artistic statement it's art opinion overridden[/QUOTE] Yeah, that's what I can say about everything. I can literally put a piece of shit in a museum and call it "Remains of myself". There is nothing special about this. And this has been said quite some times before, but on Facepunch, the popular opinion always wins. [editline]25th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;31930021]I find that more interesting and artistically significant. Here's a device, a piece of ordinary technology. From the exterior, there's nothing special about it at all. But the placard claims that it contains an incredible amount of data, and thanks to its pirated status is worth a fortune in lawsuits and compensation. It is on this knowledge alone that the object goes from a harmless piece of tech to an accessory to crime on a massive scale. But externally, and functionally, there is no difference. The machine itself is innocent, it simply takes data that is given to it. [/QUOTE] Wow, that's SO deep and SO unique!

[QUOTE=Natrox;31932450]Yeah, that's what I can say about everything. I can literally put a piece of shit in a museum and call it "Remains of myself". There is nothing special about this. And this has been said quite some times before, but on Facepunch, the popular opinion always wins. [editline]25th August 2011[/editline] Wow, that's SO deep and SO unique![/QUOTE] You're being obtuse and ignorant though, The second you say a piece of art isn't art you justify it as art. Especially since it is post-modern art, which places emphasis on the controversial

[QUOTE=Lonestriper;31932473]You're being obtuse and ignorant though, The second you say a piece of art isn't art you justify it as art. Especially since it is post-modern art, which places emphasis on the controversial[/QUOTE] No, I just grew up with a different meaning to the word "art". And I do not consider "common things" like this harddisk art. Neither the statement someone would be making with it, since again, it's nothing fucking new. But we'll call it art! I'll call it shitty art and we'll all be happy.

Art is subjective, so your entitled to hate it. Personally I don't like it that much, but i'll defend the shit out of it ...you philistine

[QUOTE=Lonestriper;31932534]Art is subjective, so your entitled to hate it. Personally I don't like it that much, but i'll defend the shit out of it ...you philistine[/QUOTE] Oh, there is plenty of art I do like. But not this, I just don't think this is very good.

[QUOTE=Natrox;31932550]Oh, there is plenty of art I do like. But not this, I just don't think this is very good.[/QUOTE] Then you have very shallow opinions of art. This is deeper than pretty colours.

[QUOTE=synthiac;31916092]speaking of modern art [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NLLRKGVDl4[/media][/QUOTE] I have xray vision!

[QUOTE=Natrox;31932450]Yeah, that's what I can say about everything. I can literally put a piece of shit in a museum and call it "Remains of myself".[/QUOTE] no you couldn't

[QUOTE=_Twitch_;31932927]Then you have very shallow opinions of art. This is deeper than pretty colours.[/QUOTE] Opinions opinions [editline]25th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31934914]no you couldn't[/QUOTE] Maybe not, but there are a lot of things where you can add some kind of deep meaning to it, with little to no effort.

[QUOTE=catbarf;31930021]I find that more interesting and artistically significant. Here's a device, a piece of ordinary technology. From the exterior, there's nothing special about it at all. But the placard claims that it contains an incredible amount of data, and thanks to its pirated status is worth a fortune in lawsuits and compensation. It is on this knowledge alone that the object goes from a harmless piece of tech to an accessory to crime on a massive scale. But externally, and functionally, there is no difference. The machine itself is innocent, it simply takes data that is given to it. But unlike, say, a knife claimed to have been used as a murder weapon, its illicit state persists. A knife is cleaned, and becomes nothing more than a tool. Whether or not it was really used in a crime doesn't change how it behaves now. But a hard drive, which stores data, does not become innocent when removed from its host machine. The crime remains on the disk. And where people might examine a murder weapon with a curious detachment- after all, its state as an instrument of violence was ephemeral, transitory- the hard drive is seen as permanently an instrument of piracy and illegality. It's more than a tool which is used and discarded and remains a tool, it carries the illegality with it. But that, of course, hinges on there being anything on the disk. Maybe there is. Maybe there isn't. No way to know. I am not an art person, but there's a lot in this exhibit worth thinking about, and that constitutes art. Dismissing it as 'just a hard drive' would be like dismissing literature as 'just stories'- it's superficial and not even taking a moment to think about what meaning there might be. Sometimes the most meaningful insights come from simply thinking about the world around us, and art is designed to inspire that kind of thought.[/QUOTE] I looked at it and thought: Looks like a hard drive.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;31935756]Looks like a hard drive.[/QUOTE] 'So it's a book about a guy who hunts a white whale and ends up dying. So?' Art requires viewer input, it's no surprise that as more passive forms of entertainment become the norm, art starts to recede. For every person who can look at a piece of art and be spurred to think, there are ten who look at it and declare it to be boring and worthless because it doesn't suddenly change colors or start moving or play Sinatra. If you don't see any point to the exhibit in the OP, that's fine, move along. Just because you don't appreciate it doesn't mean others can't or shouldn't, and the fact that it's 'just a hard drive' has no bearing on whether or not it constitutes art.

[QUOTE=The Baconator;31927707]I've never seen someone post from a Wii before.[/QUOTE] Typing on that thing is slow as all fuck. But it's in the nice cool basement.

I have a 1tb drive filled with nothing but games. Downloaded games. Yea man, gimme money. By the way, did I mention they're Steam games, and that I bought them?

[QUOTE=Sanius;31923981]Objectivity has no place in art. I can say that Mona Lisa is trash and my opinion would be just as valid as yours which is that it's not trash.[/QUOTE] No, I think it's trash too. I was just trying to argue why a painting with some technical effort may be appreciated by more than a piece that's a purely conceptual idea - a bunk one at that, in my opinion. Also, your avatar is a mindfuck.

A simple definition of art is someone that creates something that is meant to communicate something through senses of human perception.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31929248]a work's quality is what's subjective, not necessarily it's status [i]as[/i] art[/QUOTE] This is what I hate about modern art, anything can be put in a museum because someone called it art. I can't fucking stand how you could get money for calling a water bottle a work of art. I have a waterbottle at my desk right now, I think it's art, can I have cash now and get my work in a museum? It represents how you can put things in stuff.

[QUOTE=SoaringScout;31938694] I have a waterbottle at my desk right now, I think it's art, can I have cash now and get my work in a museum?[/QUOTE] why do people keep saying this no you can't have it put into a museum because you suck no-one wants to see your art stop using that stupid argument that has been regurgitated since page one.

[QUOTE=SoaringScout;31938694]This is what I hate about modern art, anything can be put in a museum because someone called it art. I can't fucking stand how you could get money for calling a water bottle a work of art. I have a waterbottle at my desk right now, I think it's art, can I have cash now and get my work in a museum? It represents how you can put things in stuff.[/QUOTE] Here is a clock. It represents lateness. [img]http://www.facepunch.com/fp/ratings/clock.png[/img] [editline]26th August 2011[/editline] Or our time-driven culture but whatever.

[QUOTE=Natrox;31932525]No, I just grew up with a different meaning to the word "art". And I do not consider "common things" like this harddisk art. Neither the statement someone would be making with it, since again, it's nothing fucking new. But we'll call it art! I'll call it shitty art and we'll all be happy.[/QUOTE] You're not an authority on art, so why are you acting like one? The point of art is everyone sees it their own way. You don't see things as art because you don't understand that there's an artistic process or artistic decisions behind a lot of "art" as you'd put it. It's still fucking art. [editline]25th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SoaringScout;31938694]This is what I hate about modern art, anything can be put in a museum because someone called it art. I can't fucking stand how you could get money for calling a water bottle a work of art. I have a waterbottle at my desk right now, I think it's art, can I have cash now and get my work in a museum? It represents how you can put things in stuff.[/QUOTE] And you don't get what the fuck that kind of art is about it. It's not about making something someone can appreciate, it's about making a decision and creating an idea in someones head. Hell, I know artists who've put work that people here would call "art" and they've put a lot of thought into it more often than not, and more often than not, they're getting a lot of thought out of the people that view it If that isn't art, I don't know what is.

[QUOTE=catbarf;31930021]I find that more interesting and artistically significant. Here's a device, a piece of ordinary technology. From the exterior, there's nothing special about it at all. But the placard claims that it contains an incredible amount of data, and thanks to its pirated status is worth a fortune in lawsuits and compensation. It is on this knowledge alone that the object goes from a harmless piece of tech to an accessory to crime on a massive scale. But externally, and functionally, there is no difference. The machine itself is innocent, it simply takes data that is given to it. But unlike, say, a knife claimed to have been used as a murder weapon, its illicit state persists. A knife is cleaned, and becomes nothing more than a tool. Whether or not it was really used in a crime doesn't change how it behaves now. But a hard drive, which stores data, does not become innocent when removed from its host machine. The crime remains on the disk. And where people might examine a murder weapon with a curious detachment- after all, its state as an instrument of violence was ephemeral, transitory- the hard drive is seen as permanently an instrument of piracy and illegality. It's more than a tool which is used and discarded and remains a tool, it carries the illegality with it. But that, of course, hinges on there being anything on the disk. Maybe there is. Maybe there isn't. No way to know. I am not an art person, but there's a lot in this exhibit worth thinking about, and that constitutes art. Dismissing it as 'just a hard drive' would be like dismissing literature as 'just stories'- it's superficial and not even taking a moment to think about what meaning there might be. Sometimes the most meaningful insights come from simply thinking about the world around us, and art is designed to inspire that kind of thought.[/QUOTE] this is what i've been wanting to say all along but was never able to construct enough words to say it. art isn't just about aesthetics. it's not all about meaning either. it can vary for each piece and even though the external HDD doesn't have any aesthetic artistic value, it's more meaningful in its content. it's art. the mona lisa is art because of its aesthetic appeal. there is no meaning behind it, it's just a very well done portrait of a woman. it's still art because it's aesthetically appealing although it carries meaning. so chill the fuck out guys, this shit's subjective.

[QUOTE=catbarf;31935800]Just because you don't appreciate it doesn't mean others can't or shouldn't, and the fact that it's 'just a hard drive' has no bearing on whether or not it constitutes art.[/QUOTE] The problem with this is that it makes [I]everything[/I] capable of being art dependent on context, which completely negates the meaning of the word "art." If enough idiots start taking this stance, we'll need a new word for "art that wasn't just made by some douchebag by putting a couple stolen book reports on a hard drive." There's a reason why the words "sound" and "noise" do not also necessarily mean "music", and it's to avoid this type of bullshit in that medium.

[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;31940293]The problem with this is that it makes [I]everything[/I] capable of being art dependent on context, which completely negates the meaning of the word "art." If enough idiots start taking this stance, we'll need a new word for "art that wasn't just made by some douchebag by putting a couple stolen book reports on a hard drive." There's a reason why the words "sound" and "noise" do not also necessarily mean "music", and it's to avoid this type of bullshit in that medium.[/QUOTE] I didn't know you were an authority on what art was and is? What's wrong with art being dependent on context? Why isn't the selection of the artist and the reasoning behind that a part of the art? It's not about what the art IS, it's about what the art makes you feel and think. Art like this is self reflexive above anything else, and isn't about tradition aesthetics. Hell, art like this has been going on since the early 20's with Duchamp and his friends. It's a part of the foundation of the last 100 years of art, and you're saying that that isn't true? also, the difference between sound, noise, and music is merely subjectivity.

[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;31940293]we'll need a new word for "art that wasn't just made by some douchebag by putting a couple stolen book reports on a hard drive."[/QUOTE] non-conceptual art?

Hardrive by toshiba, data by piratebay. The artist did not express an idea or imagining. The hardrive was not a reflection of the human condition, but a reflection of precision Japanese manufacturing processes.

[QUOTE=Rick Ross;31940697]Hardrive by toshiba, data by piratebay. The artist did not express an idea or imagining. The hardrive was not a reflection of the human condition, but a reflection of precision Japanese manufacturing processes.[/QUOTE] [quote]Piaget Stages Sensorimotor: (birth to about age 2) During this stage, the child learns about himself and his environment through motor and reflex actions. Thought derives from sensation and movement. The child learns that he is separate from his environment and that aspects of his environment—his parents or favorite toy—continue to exist even though they may be outside the reach of his senses. Teaching for a child in this stage should be geared to the sensorimotor system. You can modify behavior by using the senses: a frown, a stern or soothing voice—all serve as appropriate techniques. Preoperational: (begins about the time the child starts to talk to about age 7) Applying his new knowledge of language, the child begins to use symbols to represent objects. Early in this stage he or she also personifies objects. They are now better able to think about things and events that aren't immediately present. Oriented to the present, children have difficulty conceptualizing time. Their thinking is influenced by fantasy—the way they'd like things to be—and they assume that others see situations from his or her viewpoint. They take in information and change it in their mind to fit their ideas. Teaching must take into account the child's vivid fantasies and undeveloped sense of time. Using neutral words, body outlines and equipment a child can touch gives him an active role in learning. Concrete: (about first grade to early adolescence) During this stage, accommodation increases. The child develops an ability to think abstractly and to make rational judgments about concrete or observable phenomena, which in the past he needed to manipulate physically to understand. In teaching this child, giving him the opportunity to ask questions and to explain things back to you allows him to mentally manipulate information. Formal Operations: This stage brings cognition to its final form. This person no longer requires concrete objects to make rational judgements. At this point, he is capable of hypothetical and deductive reasoning. Teaching for the adolescent may be wideranging because he'll be able to consider many possibilities from several perspectives.[/quote] I think you're stuck in [quote]Concrete: (about first grade to early adolescence)[/quote] [editline]26th August 2011[/editline] At least in part, but the piaget stages aren't the best.