Forums > MaxMSP

Max standalones that self-destruct

June 14, 2007 | 10:26 pm

Hi everyone,

I’ve just finished a set of standalone interactive sound pieces that run only once per computer. Actually, I’m sure there are MANY here who could find ways around the limited lifespan of these standalones, but it would take at least some creativity.

If you’re interested, a more detailed description of the project is at http://www.zacharyseldess.com/scores/EmptyShell_RobbedTime_info.pdf

or you can view demo videos and download the software (Win or OSX) at the addres below – the series is at the top:

"Empty Shell, Robbed Time"

http://www.zacharyseldess.com/works.html

I’d love to hear any feedback.

best,
Zachary Seldess



jln
June 17, 2007 | 1:53 am


June 17, 2007 | 1:16 pm

Thanks Julien. I’ll look forward to hearing how it goes for you (whenever you get around to it).

Zachary


June 18, 2007 | 6:48 am

Zachary Seldess schrieb:
> I’d love to hear any feedback.

It was only a matter of time to see the copy protection technology
arrive in art… ;-)
Now the hackers will have another goal to unprotect these pieces… ;-)

I love volatile art, but I also believe that any art is in a certain
sense volatile, or better the volatile part of any art is the most
interesting part of it… (That’s the part a hacker can’t uncover, but
an artist could, if she wouldn’t be more interested to put out her own
pieces… ;-)

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


June 18, 2007 | 9:59 am

I just tried them, and i can say that the self-destruction definitely has an effect on me. I’m very conscious of my participation and i examine the content with much more attention than normal.

While I didn’t find all the art terribly interesting (Treasure Chest was actually quite good, Mouse Captive was okay, Little Digerati i didn’t understand), I’d have thrown them out much sooner if i’d known it wasn’t forever.

So i definitely like your idea here, it would be cool if would become more common so you wouldn’t have to explain it. On the other hand, it should not be used to make stuff interesting when it isn’t.


June 18, 2007 | 3:27 pm

Quote: Stefan Tiedje wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 02:48
—————————————————-

@Stefan
> It was only a matter of time to see the copy protection technology
> arrive in art… ;-)

Ha! Yes, I like the idea (at least in this scenario) of imposing lifecycle behaviors onto things that have none "naturally". It’s not typical copy protection though: Here you can copy a fresh version as many times as you want to as many computers as you want, and all will work once. So you have as many chances to listen as you have "spaces" within which to listen.

If you copy a "used" version of a piece to a new computer and run it though, you will ruin that space. (Why? I don’t know… just for fun ;)

> I love volatile art, but I also believe that any art is in a certain
> sense volatile, or better the volatile part of any art is the most
> interesting part of it… (That’s the part a hacker can’t uncover, but
> an artist could, if she wouldn’t be more interested to put out her own
> pieces… ;-)

Well said!


June 18, 2007 | 4:01 pm

Quote: Bas van der Graaff wrote on Mon, 18 June 2007 05:59
—————————————————-
@Bas van der Graaff

> While I didn’t find all the art terribly interesting (Treasure Chest was actually quite good, Mouse Captive was okay, Little Digerati i didn’t understand), I’d have thrown them out much sooner if i’d known it wasn’t forever.

And I think this is an important reason for adding the lifecyle stuff: that is, to nudge the player/listener into a pseudo-analog space where they are aware of finite time and access… much like in a live performance scenario.

Who hasn’t seen a live performance and been uninterested for a period of time? GENERALLY speaking, because of the liveness of it and the real-spaceness of it, we commit to it… wait it out. Often times, at least in my own experience, the most engaging experiental moments come after various periods of boredom or lack of interest.

We don’t as easily "throw it out" in real-space – which could amount to leaving the space. BUT, if we knew it went on forever… that’s another story.

> So i definitely like your idea here, it would be cool if would become more common so you wouldn’t have to explain it. On the other hand, it should not be used to make stuff interesting when it isn’t.

I completely agree (unless of course the point is to make uninteresting things become interesting via this technique ;)
For me, this whole approach simply provides a conceptual shell for the art. I wasn’t interested in wrapping art that I considered subpar.

Thanks for the great feedback!


June 18, 2007 | 5:21 pm

i happen to think that the idea of software that self-destructs over
time was one of nn’s better ones. i actually was looking forward to
ways that 242.senescence was going to manifest itself. perhaps it
was quietly implemented and processed as rage and social engineering,
who knows.

also see jonah brucker-cohen’s webpage that hurt a building every
time you looked at it–

http://www.mee.tcd.ie/~bruckerj/projects/alertinginfrastructure.htm

On Jun 18, 2007, at 2:48 AM, Stefan Tiedje wrote:

> Zachary Seldess schrieb:
>> I’d love to hear any feedback.
>
> It was only a matter of time to see the copy protection technology
> arrive in art… ;-)
> Now the hackers will have another goal to unprotect these
> pieces… ;-)
>
> I love volatile art, but I also believe that any art is in a
> certain sense volatile, or better the volatile part of any art is
> the most interesting part of it… (That’s the part a hacker can’t
> uncover, but an artist could, if she wouldn’t be more interested to
> put out her own pieces… ;-)
>
> Stefan
>
> —
> Stefan Tiedje————x——-
> –_____———–|————–
> –(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
> — _|_)—-|—–()————–
> ———-()——–www.ccmix.com
>
>


June 18, 2007 | 7:07 pm

and for an early pre-digital manifestation of self-destruction: see Tinguely’s sculptures of 1960/61

> also see jonah brucker-cohen’s webpage that hurt a building every
> time you looked at it–
>
> http://www.mee.tcd.ie/~bruckerj/projects/alertinginfrastructure.htm

Hadn’t seen this before. It’s great. thanks.


Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)