if server cloud memory

Was checking an app that might store stuff instantly on “cloud” while thinking: why am checking “cloud” can it not be done to my server directly?
Recently had a few chats regarding the peculiarity of remembering. Instead of recalling a X (event/person/object/etc) itself – it seems we tend recall Y that reminds of the X.. Rhymes in songs and poetry, were used specifically for assisting memory.. So do various kind of metaphors.. As in how to recall new information? Via linking it to old info/data until the new gains its own distinct confabulation? Is this another way of doing McLuhan’s going ahead while looking at the rear view mirror?

It can be said that the so called “cloud” is, in a sense, what a more tech sounding term – “server” – might refer to.. However, “cloud”, I think, is a rather more familiar term no? How many times have you seen a server? How many times clouds were in your life..?
Place your data on the internet like raindrops on a cloud.. Now we have visuals, familiar ones, to play with..

This points towards an interesting, in my mind, element(??) of recalling/memory.. A sort of inability to remember X itself, but always a Link, a reminder of X.. (Is that reminder/link a type/kind of contingency..?)

Could that (above notion of no-self), on the frequency of link, be actually a yes self? ie that the new info/data Is a link, however because we know not yet what to, nor when or how – the conservative/fearful 1st option is linking to a known, the already familiar, the concurred, or even conquered..

Indeed.. Most army units will move within a conquered area – be it into enemy controlled or in retreat. However, special forces/units will be fine operating in unlinked (to known territory), unfamiliar areas.. Not exactly avant guard because it does not reflect upon advance, but similar in the sense of un-linked or rather in an unknown that Requires perception in and of its own links/connections/life – rather than an arbitrary *pre-existed* past.. (ie if I know of clouds, the link association with internet technologies is arbitrary.. Its there mainly because one happened to have a clue regarding clouds, I think, rather than gaining clulessness regarding net techs..?)

Indeed, clouds once were masses of rock and soil/earth, before they floated in the air..

Deaf interperter at Mandela’s memorial could not


But he could dance, apparently. Moving in Not sign, but still rhythmical manner.

Seems like the non-sign-language inspired anger and some long time recriminations/frustrations by deaf communities.

Here’s a side by side example of how the signing should have been compared to how it was..

I think its also interesting that most people, including me, seem ignorant about sign language.. Ignorant in the sense that I would have thought the guy was using the correct signs, and wouldn’t have questioned it. (ie, thinking I knew something while being clueless..)

when X is an X for Y rather than modernistic?

Some of my sequences of thoughts regarding ROO and linked approaches, were criticised – mainly by my own mind – as Modernistic at least in approach, or even in culture.. (as in the stuff they cultivate..) For example, the idea of getting a sort of quint essential rhythm of an entity is a sort of reductionist approach that can be said to resemble Modernistic ones..
However, I’d like to argue that perhaps this is a case of mistaken identity.. It might look like reductionist – but it isn’t, and that the very reductionist Look/seemingness is because of a very different take to bareness than that of Modernism.. (however, why do I compare..? hummm..)

In Modern minds, as far as I can tell, the reductionism was a cultivation of the imagination of ideal. The reduction of painting to find/uncover/realise/experience/do the paintingness of painting. Or to write the book that will be the ideal of all books – book of books.. A sort of reductionism to accelerate the end of history.. Therefore, the spacetime of Modernism is an evolving reduction process towards a language of shapes, colours, materials that in and of itself was/is/will keep searching in ways that might link to ideals of colours, shapes, materials, concepts, contexts, etc..

With ROO am/we(??) trying something a bit different..
The idea is not a reduction for an ideal – but an abstraction (that looks like reduction) that is/are connectable, transferable, foldable, and crossable, collidable in its own spacetime.
This is not an ideal, but a bit like a number. 1 is not an ideal of an apple, it can be used when abstracting a single apple for connecting with an exchange/crossing/collision. I’ll give you 1 apple, and you’ll give me 2 looks? (eg.. it makes harder to agree for something like: i give you apple you give me look.. in that case, i might mean to give you the appleness of apple, the colour of apple, etc.. ie what exactly is apple without the an..?)

why am i searching around a javasript ish compression?

Transvangarde Transvantgarde and money based art spectrum?

while checking for palesitian art residencies, I bumped into october art gallery and the term Transvanguarde art, together with a promise of its bright future – together with exhibitions of transvanguarde masters of 2012 & 2013.
Really? Are they onto type error art and forgot a T? Are they referring to a re-use of transavantguarde? That was a “trans” of beyond avantguarde art..
The october gallery’s one is a trans of crossing and moving in between..
According to this very short blog entry: “..the transvangarde can perhaps best be described as an ongoing multi-cultural experiment in the visual arts that can only be understood in the context of a globally active – and consciously interactive – contemporary art scene without borders or boundaries.” (And the blog’s name is african art..)

Fine words.. However, perhaps am too sceptic(??) that am failing to perceive something(??), the label (transvanguarde), its usage and the objects/artefacts seem to me very culturally specific – they all seem of capitalistic culture. I guess it depends on certain definitions, which are shifty, however why do we have to buy into a geographic based cultural definitions? In a sense, if indeed this is an “experiment” as the blurb says, or a sort of “movement”, that rejects geographical base cultural and artistic definitions, maybe the socio-economic critical cultural approach to this is precisely what’s appropriate and respectful of the transvanguade’s proponent’s intents?

The african art’s short blog post that basically seem to try and direct me to a book about transvanguarde artists, appears suspiciously like a sales pitch to me. Beyond the question of wrongness, or otherwise, of attempting to sell stuff, am simply attempting to describe here what IT IS, in my mind – not whether its X or Y on a wrong/right scale.
One element though is not enough for me, we need to cross, to trans even for some realisations that perhaps have some grounding.. (just like finding stuff in libraries..)
So.. check the october art gallery website.. Check the terms and usage of images.. The minimal images approach, that supposed to make me feel as if there is something out in the gallery to visit – just because the gallery imposes some degree of scarcity, seems very capitalistic in its culture. The attempt to glorify, both in terms of words and scarcity, the transvanguarde art, artists and objects, appears to me suspiciously like art linked proponents in the 80’s that tried to prepare, manufacture and sell art trends and movements. That, again, seems to me part and parcel of capitalistic culture where the ideology of financial, numerical, and power gains, seem to be the kind of practices that are venerated, celebrated and cultivated..

True, this is not exactly my culture. Or it might be argued that I’d like it not to be my culture, yet it is the culture I know..
However, am not trying here to down-play capitalistic cultural practices, just highlight that the trans in transvanguarde art linked objects – might not cross much.. Not if we try to look at it from its own terms.. Event the avant-guarde reference in the name, seems for me to be a link to a vey specific culture of art history. A history that is based on and within capitalism, yes the very capitalism some avatguarde movements wanted to reject – however, this is a singular culture.. Indeed, without the singularity, the very metaphor and militaristic reference of avant guarde – is meaningless..

The idea of crossing and transing though is very evocative for me.. Transing rhythmically rather than geographically..

my conflation? confabulation? is it whatever you want it/me to be?

I think my so called brain has been conflating reducing with transing – and the other way around.. Transing a step, making it transferable, changing it into a transferable element, means no reduction by default. (..am not being anti-reductionist by sort of ideology of some kind.. Think/hope/intend/ not.. just that using reduction is not, or should not be sort of default.. Perhaps it was, for a while a default in my mind..?)