So now I propose that we move on from unmade objects to uncomputable practices with Valentina Vucic, who's going to tell us a little bit about how artistic can shift our perception to informal, unconventionalventional and uncomputable. Hi. Hi. So I will present a project idea, so nothing happened yet. And it's to... And I will talk a little bit about... I will try to sketch the idea and what I would like to do and maybe a little bit why. So it's called Uncomputable 1, the project, and uncomputable has multiple meanings and the first is irrational technologies, maybe the first technologies for European border regimes, but it could also be, it can also mean uncomputable for artistic practice and I will not call it artistic practice anymore but more like semi-formal or unconventional or non-standard because I would like to try to or I'm thinking about how to apply it in non-artistic context and how to make it useful and the one means also multiple things someone could, one is non-artistic context and how to make it useful. And the one means also multiple things. Someone could, one is monolithic and another one is like a collective identity. So it can also have different meaning in different contexts. And I think about a non-institutional kind of study and research. And in that, so it would work quite low level on technical artifacts. So on code, on manuals, on developers' output or requirements or specification of technologies. requirements or specification of technologies and to read them or process them and non educational ways kind of to do whatever is intended by person, me, someone else doing it. And, or maybe, so I would just go through to make one example of what I mean. And I come, so I have applied computing science education from the mid-90s, and luckily I forgot most of it. mid 90s and luckily I forgot most of it and later went to media art. I was in Zurich in the early 2000 for New Media and we were 2003 the school participated at the Ars Electronica here with one collective project which was the the Thieleklettergarten, which was a climbing wall on the building of the Kunstuniversität. And the building was a giant keyboard, which could be pressed with on-off buttons placed on the building. And the people climbing would type software which was patented. This was one project, and I was working with a friend on a social science fiction shower, something. And then I also worked in industries and in computing for a hearing aid company. So I'm visiting multiple, or I've been visiting and part of technology in different contexts. So technology in art, technology in real life, technology in different ways. life technology in different ways. And when I discovered induction coils and started to pick up on electromagnetic fields of computers and started to make music slash noise slash disco now from the electromagnetics I improvised with computing processes, which we'll do Saturday night. I improvise with computing processes, which we'll do Saturday night. But in secret, behind, without a public, I was reading technical documentation on how one specific research field, which is side channel analysis or side channel attack, how it's reading systems through its physical emissions. So it's kind of an approach to technology from the side and reading and understanding, more important, understanding technology from its effects and from how it's intertwined with its environments and how things that are logically separated, how they are interdependent and interfering in each other. And so I will talk about the kind of being busy with technology that I missed and that I would like to find a space to do it. And to give one example, there is a paper by Tara McPherson where she's thinking, where she is making a connection between the principle of modularization in Unix to segregation in societies, and where she makes the argument that they are intertwined intrinsically and this is this is an argument it's not an evidence but this is the kind of it's one example of thinking computing from a different, very different angle which is so far not strong enough. Then another like the question that kind of captures it is so thinking about digital technologies as infrastructures of abstraction and then there's another paper which appeared within an institutional setting. So it was a university in computer science which decided we want to make ethical computing. And so they tried to install a critical approach to technology. And this paper describes why this fails. And they say, yeah, it's so intrinsic in the whole structures even if the goodwill is there it's kind of impossible and this question how computer science and education produces anti-political subjects is kind of a good question for me and then one very blunt example that's maybe good from generative algorithms, the imperialist competitive algorithm, which is used quite widely. What is interesting is in the Wikipedia entry of it, which is very, very, very bare, like there was almost never a discussion what it means to widely use an algorithmic structure like that. So there was one time a request to delete it, but not for its... more to disvalue the algorithm itself and not for its implications. But usually it's not so straightforward. I mean, it can be, but not necessarily it's not. So they say in this paper like abstraction and computer science is kind of a wall to a critical technical pedagogy. And I would like to expand this question to not just computer science but computer practice and how it produces anti-political subjects and scenarios and to propose like a reading of technical documentation. So it's not a theory, but it's a reading of technical detail. And then one of the motivations to try to leave an institutional, educational and also artistic context is like the real need to not just understand but to deal with technical documents and technical artifacts in order to be able to negotiate them on a larger scale. And the Border Violence Monitoring Network, for example, last year, at the end of the year, they wrote a report, and it was like a letter to the UN and to the EU, to, no, it was to the UN, and they were describing why it's not possible, why not all stakeholders of these technologies are considered at all. And they write technical standards and the processes by which they are established are inaccessible and then for multiple reasons and one of them being the technicality of documents and language which will basically never change. It will stay technical and then there will be levels of mediation and of translation and then it's a matter to find people to trust or organizations to trust how they translate. So the idea that I have is more to, like not to learn something in the sense of gaining a technical knowledge, but to spend time for any time, can be short, can be long, for a deep dive into a technical scenario. And not to get a more non-analytical understanding of it, and to find a way to process it in a more tangible way, whatever is suitable for the person looking at a document. One example, which is, there was the iBorder control EU research project, it's already a few years old, but it's interesting because a member of the European Parliament, Patrick Breyer, he filed a transparency lawsuit to get the documents. He received a little bit, and much of it is redacted. But it's already a start to look into the argumentations and the thinking. And then besides the technical documents, I'd like to propose like a double reading or like to read the documents through either questions which are there or through another thought or another analysis. And I bring now the example of Ruth Gilmore, because it was mentioned here yesterday in the morning sessions. And I came across it by chance. And while I was working on infrastructures of abstraction, it just struck me, yeah, I would like, like I'm not doing theory, I'm not reading all the critical computing literature, but I am reading some, and the intention is also not to make a media theory, but to apply a media theory and to use it as a working tool. And this would be one thing I would like to do, like to spend time, a month or two months, to read into this concept of infrastructure as a feeling in Ruth Gilmour's case. And she is basing it on another concept, which is older from Raymond Williams' structure of feeling, where they say, so this is now relating to the morning session of yesterday. Each age has its own structure of feeling, a narrative structure for understanding the dynamic material limits to the possibility of change. So I would have this question in mind when reading technical low-level documents. We might best understand tradition as an accumulation of structures of feeling that gather not by chance, nor through a natural process that would seem like a drift or tide, but rather by way of what we call the selection and reselection of ancestors. And here, it's not the nice ancestors, but it's the past that is shaping how and why these research projects work the way they do. And I would kind of like your detailed, low-level, personal way to think this together. And personal doesn't, or private doesn't mean me alone, but it could be with other people too. But the idea is not to present findings. So it's not about working towards a representation in artistic context, also not to write about it. But it's about the process of doing that and to finding ways to share it. So this private processing, it means spending time to relate fragments which are unrelated out of systemic reasons, and it could be like a third pillar to secret intelligence or open source intelligence, like kind of a private intelligence, which is not private as individual necessarily, but a group. And I also like a lot the two concepts from Gauda Klumpite and Lauren Britton about abstracting otherwise. It's a different way to use the power of abstraction in a political framing. And this would be kind of to put this in practice. practice. And so I'm, they didn't begin yet but part of that would be also kind of to find some toolings so it could be the search engines from EEFFF that are doing their collective reading of the Yandex Quaker this afternoon so it could be incorporating a tool like that, it would be nice. And a way to synchronize multiple nodes, I also think more of an offline setting or a workshop setting or a longer individual process and then maybe a way to synchronize the different ways. And it could be like how to disassemble or how to dissect or fragmentize documents, how to annotate them, how to put them back together, it could be things like that, how to write, yeah. And then the traces would be published somewhere but this is not the goal, Like, it could be. But one example I have is a befriended website, which is a micro platform for artistic research, which is looking at different power relations. And it's a collection. It's made with collective access. It's a platform useful in libraries and it's a way to collect documents and to make different narratives on it. This is one example. So yeah, the idea is kind of how to inverse the computational, so it's not a technical term, the inverting, but to change the starting point and change the end point of dealing with technologies. That's it. Thank you.