Comments for The Politics of Systems

Comment on netvizz – facebook to gephi by Network Analysis of Russian Protest Groups on Facebook using Gephi and Netvizz | Nodus Labs

Sun, 25 Dec 2011 15:46:43 +0000

[...] (edges) between them. This file can be generated by the netvizz Facebook app (authored by Bernhard Rieder) for the groups that you are a member of. Activate the app, join the group you want to analyze, go [...]

Comment on netvizz – facebook to gephi by abi

abi — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 00:51:59 +0000

why this happened?

netvizz v0.4

Fatal error: Uncaught Exception: 18: This API call could not be completed due to resource limits thrown in C:\UniServer\www\facebook\netvizz\src\base_facebook.php on line 708

Comment on a two-click like button for more privacy by My-Gate.NET

My-Gate.NET — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:57:58 +0000

Found your post over google, while searching for an implementation of the concept specially for WordPress.
Unfortunatly your Blog doesn’t contain a link to code provided by Heise nor does it state the name of the project.
So I’m happy to add this here:
socialshareprivacy
http://www.heise.de/extras/socialshareprivacy/

(For WordPress: Just search that term in the add new plugin box.)

Comment on moral preprocessing by Paper: Institutionalizing without Institutions? Web 2.0 and the Conundrum of Democracy

Sat, 22 Oct 2011 10:10:42 +0000

[...] This preprint of a paper I have written about a year and a half ago, entitled Institutionalizing without Institutions? Web 2.0 and the Conundrum of Democracy, is the direct result of what I experienced as a major cultural destabilization. Born in Austria, living in France (and soon the Netherlands), and working in a field that has a strong connection with American culture and scholarship, I had the feeling that debates about the political potential of the Internet were strongly structured along national lines. I called this moral preprocessing. [...]

Comment on goldman-sachs, software critic by Bernhard

Bernhard — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:48:36 +0000

Good point!

Another problem is that the these internals play out differently according to the number of investors that actually use them. A bit like in the case of LTCM in the late nineties: with many other funds duplicating their investment strategies, their intellectual success (in the sense that many people thought that with so many big brains you can’t go wrong) may have produced the conditions for their downfall…

Comment on goldman-sachs, software critic by Dmitry Paranyushkin

Dmitry Paranyushkin — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:24:09 +0000

There’s a very interesting book called The Blank Swan on financial software that describes trading as writing. By the way the guy who wrote it runs a company in France, which offers the software that can predict the behavior of other software products used in the markets – somewhat meta-take on trading.

Your point makes me think though that it’s important to know what context the software was actually created in. Because the embedded rules and algorithms may be related to a specific agenda, which is simply outdated or does not have anything to do with the current developments. If trading is writing then I want to use the language with an adequate vocabulary.

Comment on netvizz – facebook to gephi by First Gephi Meetup in Berlin | Nodus Labs

First Gephi Meetup in Berlin | Nodus Labs — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 12:18:36 +0000

[...] then moved on to analyze our Facebook friend networks, using netvizz Facebook application by Berhnard Rieder and Gephi. Running some basic metrics and filters allows [...]

Comment on heterogeneous twitter mapping by Mapping Online Publics » Blog Archive » Twitter and the Royal Wedding, Pt. 2: Something New

Thu, 11 Aug 2011 23:13:27 +0000

[...] to see how our results will differ in those cases. We’ll also have a play at creating some of the heterogeneous Twitter maps which Bernhard Rieder over at The Politics of Systems has flagged – some very interesting ideas for further [...]

Comment on a fragment of simondon by Bernhard

Bernhard — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 09:43:38 +0000

Bonjour Samuel,

Non et non.

Simondon est quand même assez clair sur le premier point, il parle explicitement d’une éthique liée aux techniques et une autre liée à la pensée religieuse. Dans les faits les deux s’interpellent mais Simondon fait bien la distinction de deux formes – dans le sens de deux procédés, deux façons (rien à voir avec la question formel/informel – le terme “forme” est fortement polysémique).

La distinction entre pensée technique et pensée religieuse chez Simondon s’articule autour du rapport élément / totalité, éthique du comment / éthique du pourquoi.

Comment on a fragment of simondon by Samuel Szoniecky

Samuel Szoniecky — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 09:21:14 +0000

Il me semble qu’il n’y a pas deux “formes” d’éthique mais que l’éthique est la mise en relation des deux niveaux dont tu parles.
Peut-on parler de forme concernant ces deux niveaux ? La distinction entre pensée technique et religieuse n’est-elle pas justement une séparation entre le formel et l’informel ?