Really remarkable how Olafur's studio creates forced perspective in a sense that those who are not dealing with spacial design and utility on a daily basis still see and experience what he wants them to. Beautiful.
I've worked in an art museum that featured an Olafour Eliasson exhebition, and I've been a fan oever since. Seeing visitors of all ages repond to his works, is quite amazing. Kids and old people alike will stand around for a long time and really experience the visual, and interact with it. It really is amazing to watch. The pictures in this video does not do his work justice. And writing him off without experiencing it is doing yourself a great disservice. The same goes for Bill Viola.
woah i love the depth of his works.. some conceptual artworks are really shallow and self-indulgent but you can tell Eliasson is tapping into much deeper collective issues of society as well as acknowledging the viewer's agency within it. love it.
I went to the Tate Modern turbine gallery exhibition with the giant sun and haze and it was amazing...you could feel heat but there wasn't any..weird but nice....
this is a very very deep talk. i usually find these kind of philosphical talks about what it is to be or why it is what we do. but this talk was very well structured and found it very interesting, to realize what is between "thinking, feeling, and doing" very good very good :)
It's rainy, nice and grey (I prefer the English spelling of grey because it's like a polo to a t-shirt), so I soon will be taking pictures of the grey!
Happy those which had possibility to be in nearby this Artist! To be on this explain! Maybe this by difference of value, the difference of sensibility.. comments are so negative.. For me it is great, it fascinates me way the thinkings, the perception of world the ideology. Amazing he is. So ordinarily - amazing!
You understand that we subsidize tons of things that are/are not productive. We subsidize farmers, manufacturers, research, schools and universities, the elderly, the disabled, etc.
The concept Eliasson represents is much like science, because he works with time, space, perceptions and reality. But just because his installations share similar subject matters to science, this does not make him any less of an artist. After all, who are you to judge?
which part?....for instance the whole river thing was to show people that the city isnt static....(represented by the fact that the ink was changing with time) so behaving like like the city is static, will keep it the same, but recogising this and doing something can make an effect.
Original ownership / first ownership I think most people agree would be basically squatters rights / homesteading. If you take unused / natural land or resources and transform them meaningfully in a way to add value, then the newly created resource is yours. Existing ownership would probably largely continue. Although large unused plots would be open to invasion by homesteaders obviously. Currently you cannot own land, only lease it from the gov't. Under common law you can own land outright.
It is very possible that some of those on his staff work for nothing. It is no secret that famous architects have young people working in their offices who are paid NOTHING. These interns are dying for an opportunity to connect with an important office -- it looks good on their resume and it gives them some legitimacy when they make reference to it later. "Oh! You worked in Frank Gehry's office? Wow! You are someone I want to know."
Tourists and art... it has been my experience through direct observation that when something becomes a tourist attraction (a work of art or piece of architecture) it is ruined. Walking up the Spanish Steps in Rome when there is no one else there is very different from stepping over or around 3,000 people who make it their afternoon hangout. I have been extremely lucky that I saw many wonderful top notch things in perfect settings (the only person in installations by Ann Hamilton and by Bill Viola) or one of only a handful of people in the Piazza San Marco (Venice) or inside St. Peter's Basilica. Before CoVid both of those places became noisy gatherings of too many tourists (thousands of them). That ruins everything.
Charity only works to a certain extent as people are unwilling to contribute to something so large they cannot comprehend it. Your system may work in small numbers humans can understand. All people want, education, health, transport. We pool our resources to achieve these. If we started from scratch and under your system none of these goods would arise as people aren't far sighted enough to work full time and devote themselves to grouping into hundreds of factions for every service they need.
@HKragh Or maybe you just havn't thought about it deeply enough or don't care enough to make the connections that he's discussing. He isn't talking about art as academia, it's self-awareness and the ability to analyse the space around you along with the socio-cultural consequence of our interation with it. Things normal people should do every day (but are usually too lazy/shallow to). If you can't be arsed to understand that's not his fault.
Freehold land is virtually nonexistent in the world today. Everywhere you go the gov't reserves the 'right' or simply uses force to control the land that you 'buy' in it's geographical territory. But really the land is as much yours in their minds as a car you borrowed for a day. There's no shortage of land, yet. Population is set to level off at 8.5 billion; even with that many people there is still tons of land. And don't forget space and the oceans, they are unclaimed as yet.
There are two ways of gathering resources. The economics means (also known as work) and the political means (also known as taxation.) The closest any society has come to outlawing the political means (which is theft, fraud, slavery, and war) is probably in the mild west. But also, ancient iceland and ireland had quite liberal societies in which taxation and central government were really very very minimal. I think philosophical anarchism is as possible as protestantism was when it first emerged
So far example, with socialized medicine, which is a common thing, everyone will try to get as much out of it as they can whilst putting back in as little as possible. And for the tax pool in general: everyone will try to get as many benefits as possible out of the tax pool whilst putting back in as little as possible. You are correct about the tragedy of the commons sir, it is simply that the argument works against rather than in favour of your position.
Because there's something elegant and beautiful about it - something about the impossibility that is inspiring - and I think that helps people to look at designing cars from a different angle. Ice is beautiful, why not construct it and try to mimic it? (and don't give me BS about the look of vehicles doesn't matter, because consumers respond to looks and manufacturers spend huge amounts of money on aesthetics).
There isn't such a thing as private insurance anywhere in the world right now. What you have are closed markets (oligopolies) supported by government legislation in which it is necessary to have a rare government issued license to run an insurance company. This monopoly causes prices to be very high. Fire in next-door neighbours house or emergency is easily solved by charity work on the part of private companies (good will). Or, if you don't trust, have a voluntary community fund.
As Olafur says 'Who decides what reality is?' In other words storytellerjack22, nothing is irrelevant and everything is deeper and more interesting if you take the time to look at it. Suspend (if you are capable) yr judgements about other ppls agendas and enjoy the new knowledge presented to you by the net with open mind, not with suspicion and cynicism. This is all for YOU! Enjoy it and don't ask silly questions. I know I sound self-righteous, but then, I'm just another blathering old nerd...
In this sense libertarianism is definitely (population and new land) expansionary and implicitly natalist / pro-human. Fortunately the advent of better more powerful technologies which flourish under favorable market conditions alleviates resource shortages better than any other system. And precisely because market forces are not impeded the prices of resources accurately reflect scarcity and therefore the need for exploration. Google seasteading for an example of this in progress.
Right, but what he SAID was: "...who decides what reality IS..." No one does. I agree with you that he is trying to change how we think of reality. But that is not changing reality itself, other than that part of reality that IS our perceptions. It sounds picky, but it is a pet peeve of mine when people talk imprecisely about reality and perception in such a way that it confuses the two. GOOD perception reflects reality. Bad philosophy can not distinguish between the two.
Consider a small scale we can understand. The people of a village contribute to defense and pay collectively for a leader to go to other towns and negotiate prices for their products. Anyone who doesn't want to pay isn't part of the village. The village is a country with government. You still haven't explained how a fire service would work, or high speed broadband etc... wouldn't we be at the mercy of companies? Do you agree at least that we couldn't have got to where we are without government?
Also 1337cole, did you even read my comment. In my first comment I never even mentioned tax dollars only that it was a waste of money - regardless of whether it was publicly or privately funded. It was a waterfall in the middle of a city. It does not give a sense of scale as there are no natural landmarks by which to gauge it. The mountains he spoke of are not present and the scale of buildings is not an apples to apples comparison with mountains in terms of scale. Pointless subjective waste.
No, I claimed that you posting was counter-productive, which is different from claiming that his art is productive. And I'd have to ask how did you find out that his art was not productive. Did you interview everyone who saw the art and they admitted that they were not moved or touched by it to action. Did you measure his productivity against an artist scale and determine that it was lacking? Did it not conform to some productive art form?
The elderly, the disabled? Haven't you heard of the tragedy of the commons. There's a shared commons and it's in each herder's self interest to let as many of his cows graze there as he can but if everyone makes this decision which is beneficial to himself then eventually the commons are ruined for all. If we pool resources through taxes then we can make things that we wouldn't pay for individually because we fear others wouldn't participate equally or we can't see the long term product.
How do you define ownership? If we start again under a completely new system I don't see how the old ideas of ownership apply. You would be coercing me as a non owner to live in a world where people can 'own' land. Ownership is based on agreement and protect by law (ie: government). I don't want to be forced into your world of ownership, ie: theft and violence. How can you tell me that I can't live on a piece of land just because you claim to own it?
How is something beautiful supposed to stand aside because its 'expensive'. Where would we be if anything anyone cared about was money? Well anyway, one mans trash is another mans treasure.
I don't think you know what the tragedy of the commons is. The tragedy is that by acting in one's own self interest we actually act against our best interests long term. The commons are destroyed by selfish but rational behaviour. For example, you may one day have a seriously disabled child and find it beyond your means to look after them. As such it is in your own self interests to make sure society looks after the unfortunates as that may one day be you.
If this guy wants to make a waterfall in New York, that's all fine and good, as long as he's the only person funding it. There's no reason why the City of New York, the state of New York, or the US government should fund this. The government should be in a money crunch right now, because they are too far in debt.
Yes. Anything that requires theft -- slavery -- to exist is unproductive by the emergent and fair scale of the market. You produce something by combining land labour and capital, if the total market value of the product is less than that of the resources used to produce, then you are operating at a loss; in other words you are being unproductive relative to the production others could engage in with those same resources.
I dont enjoy this kind of art but architects do talk in this fashion, and they have a need to rationalize their work and communicate their ideas (usually among themselves) in the planning stages, but like engineering calculations, its not stage material. I liked being inside Tate Modern though, but his installations need to be experienced. Talking about them or even showing the pictures has no sense or impact what so ever.
There goes the somalia reference. I was waiting for that one. Can we make clear that somalia is not philosophical anarchy. You call somalia anarchy because it has no powerful central state, but by the same definition I could call the pacific anarchy because all the islands there have no central state -- but they still have states. It is not anarchy, and you know it, and I know it. So lets call a dog a dog.
Well then let's have a referendum and ask people whether they want to abandon public schools, the fire department, ambulances, emergency care, healthcare, buses, tubes... and start from scratch. I'm sure the vast majority would 'voluntarily' choose government. If you don't want government then you can go Somalia. You get suffering and death when the poor and uneducated aren't protected and their children aren't given opportunities to better themselves as evidenced by history.
1337cole Don't bs me. In addition to the cost of building it; the object was set up on a public infrastructure and located in a major metropolitan city. There were city engineers that had to be consulted. Politicians had to be schmoozed to get it built, safety systems arranged and approved through city bureaucracy... Tell me that every penny was paid for from private donation and I will need for you to show me your sources for your belief of private funding. And show me the return on investment.
Your village would be fascism. If people properly own the land they occupy in the village then their contributions or noncontributions to community funds have no effect on their continued proper ownership of property in that village. What you suggest is raw majority tyranny, or fascism. Your services would work the way most do now. If you need a taxi, you call one and pay for your trip. Or, alternatively, you could bundle police, fire with insurance. Internet is already private.
You think it would be better if everyone paid companies separately? Say there is a fire in a house next door to you but they weren't a member of a fire service... Or say there was an infectious disease which could be eliminated by a pooling of resources. Does private insurance do a better job than say, the European systems. Do you really think your system was workable in large populations before the advent of telecommunications? It's actually the tragedy of the unregulated commons.
I did not like the waterfall in New York. I thought it was a waste of effort, money and time. The artist's explanation sounds contrived to justify the silly nature of the piece. If you want to know distance, space and time in a city you simply watch a different kind of flow. Pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic flow. You gain an added functional component with traffic in the sense that time is not just measured by a fixed waterfall rate but by a variable traffic flow rate yielding time of day.
#University #Academy AMERICA - VIA PHYSICIST ION MURGU FROM OHIO, USA BROUGHT TO HUMANITY UNIVERSAL TWO FUNDAMENTALS INTO 2015 SEPTEMBER 24 . 1- Lost Fundamental. 2. Fermat's Last Theorem Fundamental. {Maybe My name is Disorder, but I blessed those two Fundamentals by 40 years of work and not to Fermat's Last Theorem but to bless our Dependencies [(1/r)^2- what is important in ? all.] } Scientist's YOU KNOW Fermat's Last Theorem now is FUNDAMENTAL IN SCIENCE and will brought a lot on? #FermatLastTheorem #Math #Science #ScienceNews #News #EarthProudDay #IonMurguCirclesParadox #FermatMurguTheorem #EulerMurguEquation1Equal1 Fermat's Last Theorem , was SOLVED INTO SCIENCE SAINT DAY - 2015 SEPTEMBER 24 - BY AN AMERICAN PHYSICIST - ION MURGU FROM OHIO, USA. Because '93 - '94, '95 PROOF was a common mistake , or INTENDED ONE (nobody know) the author published it until now into an allusive mode, because the Method Fermat-Murgu Impossible Equations remain a certain proof for- IS A NEW METHOD, NEVER USED AND AS YOU SEE HEAVY TO UNDERSTAND - MAYBE YET NOBODY UNDERSTOOD IT. Fermat-Murgu Natural Solution and The Beauty - EULER - MURGU EQUATION 1=1 - ARE coming to Certify it. I NAMED IT {EULER - MURGU EQUATION 1=1} AS RESPECT AND GRATITUDE FOR EULER - A GIANT OF MATH - EVEN IF EULER HIMSELF WAS BLINDED BY {(e)-iPI +1=0} Euler - God Equation, and to understand it luck for Ion Murgu Circles Paradox - THE BEAUTY OF PARADOXES - AND Pythagorean Prime Numbers which can say Define the raze of "Perfect Circles". www.climaticdisorder.com/
Why are all of you old nerds blathering about your own agendas?!?! Hasn't anyone noticed that this talk is just bullcrap? This guy is just trying to validate his failed life as an expencive fake artist, and it makes me sick. I have no idea what he's talking about -especially when he's trying to explain why his work is important, because it isn't.
One of those guys too full of himself to being able to convey his ideas in an understandable way to people who hasn't been working with the subject for several years. Some people just can't communicate effectivally, but somehow thinks their own needs to sound intelligent/deep in their own ears, trumphs the audiances needs to get the message...
You do realize most of the folks sitting there are interested and knowledgable about what he's talking about...right? You can't just buy tickets to hear them talk, you have to be invited. And they don't invite idiots to fill seats.
At 2:00: NO ONE decides what reality is! Reality is what it already is! Our perceptions of reality change and differ from that of others, but reality itself is just what it is. This guy has a bad metaphysics. If his foundational philosophy is messed up, then that reduces his ability to do things in the world.
a video about space and light, and if you read the comment section you'll think we are adressing obama's healthcare plan, darfur, somalia and what not. some people just made it a skill to just sidetrack every single comment section on TED. the topic is interesting but I can see why its not thrilling if you are not passionated about the issue at hand,.
What I mean is that he's boring as all hell and I couldn't even finish watching it. nobody should care about the speed of falling water putting the New York skyline in perspective, because it's just expencive art that serves no valuable purpose. **I don't know what person would find this talk the least bit interesting, but good luck to you.
"Why we do things?" rather than "how we do things?". This is a way to ask for responsibility. Brilliant!
Really remarkable how Olafur's studio creates forced perspective in a sense that those who are not dealing with spacial design and utility on a daily basis still see and experience what he wants them to. Beautiful.
I've worked in an art museum that featured an Olafour Eliasson exhebition, and I've been a fan oever since.
Seeing visitors of all ages repond to his works, is quite amazing. Kids and old people alike will stand around for a long time and really experience the visual, and interact with it. It really is amazing to watch.
The pictures in this video does not do his work justice. And writing him off without experiencing it is doing yourself a great disservice.
The same goes for Bill Viola.
Wow, the insightfulness Olafur expresses during the waterfall/space segment is incredible.
woah i love the depth of his works.. some conceptual artworks are really shallow and self-indulgent but you can tell Eliasson is tapping into much deeper collective issues of society as well as acknowledging the viewer's agency within it. love it.
This was fascinating. This guy is a refreshing and original thinker. He conveyed the spirit and relevance of art in a highly condensed manner.
Wunderschöne, richtige Überlegungen! Die Welt braucht unsere Olafsons - so kommen wir weiter ❤️.
I went to the Tate Modern turbine gallery exhibition with the giant sun and haze and it was amazing...you could feel heat but there wasn't any..weird but nice....
this is a very very deep talk. i usually find these kind of philosphical talks about what it is to be or why it is what we do. but this talk was very well structured and found it very interesting, to realize what is between "thinking, feeling, and doing"
very good very good :)
Terrific TED. Thanks.
It's rainy, nice and grey (I prefer the English spelling of grey because it's like a polo to a t-shirt), so I soon will be taking pictures of the grey!
good example with the waterfall. i like how these clips totally confuse the youtube audience
very good！
Happy those which had possibility to be in nearby this Artist! To be on this explain! Maybe this by difference of value, the difference of sensibility.. comments are so negative.. For me it is great, it fascinates me way the thinkings, the perception of world the ideology. Amazing he is. So ordinarily - amazing!
You understand that we subsidize tons of things that are/are not productive. We subsidize farmers, manufacturers, research, schools and universities, the elderly, the disabled, etc.
The concept Eliasson represents is much like science, because he works with time, space, perceptions and reality.
But just because his installations share similar subject matters to science, this does not make him any less of an artist. After all, who are you to judge?
which part?....for instance the whole river thing was to show people that the city isnt static....(represented by the fact that the ink was changing with time) so behaving like like the city is static, will keep it the same, but recogising this and doing something can make an effect.
My fav. cont. artist - essencialist ;)
Original ownership / first ownership I think most people agree would be basically squatters rights / homesteading. If you take unused / natural land or resources and transform them meaningfully in a way to add value, then the newly created resource is yours.
Existing ownership would probably largely continue. Although large unused plots would be open to invasion by homesteaders obviously.
Currently you cannot own land, only lease it from the gov't. Under common law you can own land outright.
Interesting talk and great artwork. 5/5.
Can anyone tell me how he acquires his staff? What do they receive in return for working with him?
It is very possible that some of those on his staff work for nothing. It is no secret that famous architects have young people working in their offices who are paid NOTHING. These interns are dying for an opportunity to connect with an important office -- it looks good on their resume and it gives them some legitimacy when they make reference to it later.
"Oh! You worked in Frank Gehry's office? Wow! You are someone I want to know."
Nice talk.
Right on!
well, one thing that expensive art can do is attract more tourists . . .
Tourists and art... it has been my experience through direct observation that when something becomes a tourist attraction (a work of art or piece of architecture) it is ruined. Walking up the Spanish Steps in Rome when there is no one else there is very different from stepping over or around 3,000 people who make it their afternoon hangout. I have been extremely lucky that I saw many wonderful top notch things in perfect settings (the only person in installations by Ann Hamilton and by Bill Viola) or one of only a handful of people in the Piazza San Marco (Venice) or inside St. Peter's Basilica. Before CoVid both of those places became noisy gatherings of too many tourists (thousands of them). That ruins everything.
I agree, except for the silly questions comment. Questions should be encouraged - the promote dialogue, growth, and understanding.
In other words: evil begets evil. Violence solves nothing, and the state is an institution of violence.
fascinating. However, I must say that I think experience comes from thinking and doing.
Charity only works to a certain extent as people are unwilling to contribute to something so large they cannot comprehend it. Your system may work in small numbers humans can understand.
All people want, education, health, transport. We pool our resources to achieve these. If we started from scratch and under your system none of these goods would arise as people aren't far sighted enough to work full time and devote themselves to grouping into hundreds of factions for every service they need.
8:30 what does he say? can anyone answer me, please? I just can't understand what "culture" he is talking about!
@HKragh Or maybe you just havn't thought about it deeply enough or don't care enough to make the connections that he's discussing. He isn't talking about art as academia, it's self-awareness and the ability to analyse the space around you along with the socio-cultural consequence of our interation with it. Things normal people should do every day (but are usually too lazy/shallow to). If you can't be arsed to understand that's not his fault.
Freehold land is virtually nonexistent in the world today. Everywhere you go the gov't reserves the 'right' or simply uses force to control the land that you 'buy' in it's geographical territory. But really the land is as much yours in their minds as a car you borrowed for a day.
There's no shortage of land, yet. Population is set to level off at 8.5 billion; even with that many people there is still tons of land. And don't forget space and the oceans, they are unclaimed as yet.
There are two ways of gathering resources. The economics means (also known as work) and the political means (also known as taxation.) The closest any society has come to outlawing the political means (which is theft, fraud, slavery, and war) is probably in the mild west. But also, ancient iceland and ireland had quite liberal societies in which taxation and central government were really very very minimal.
I think philosophical anarchism is as possible as protestantism was when it first emerged
Funny, your post is actually counter-productive.
The market does. Didn't you hear the part where he gets paid by the government?
So far example, with socialized medicine, which is a common thing, everyone will try to get as much out of it as they can whilst putting back in as little as possible.
And for the tax pool in general: everyone will try to get as many benefits as possible out of the tax pool whilst putting back in as little as possible.
You are correct about the tragedy of the commons sir, it is simply that the argument works against rather than in favour of your position.
very very very very very true
I wish I could visit that installation at tate modern...
Was that directed at me?
couldn't agree more man
Because there's something elegant and beautiful about it - something about the impossibility that is inspiring - and I think that helps people to look at designing cars from a different angle. Ice is beautiful, why not construct it and try to mimic it? (and don't give me BS about the look of vehicles doesn't matter, because consumers respond to looks and manufacturers spend huge amounts of money on aesthetics).
There isn't such a thing as private insurance anywhere in the world right now. What you have are closed markets (oligopolies) supported by government legislation in which it is necessary to have a rare government issued license to run an insurance company. This monopoly causes prices to be very high.
Fire in next-door neighbours house or emergency is easily solved by charity work on the part of private companies (good will). Or, if you don't trust, have a voluntary community fund.
💙💙💙❤️😍
Artuminous and expensive.
As Olafur says 'Who decides what reality is?' In other words storytellerjack22, nothing is irrelevant and everything is deeper and more interesting if you take the time to look at it. Suspend (if you are capable) yr judgements about other ppls agendas and enjoy the new knowledge presented to you by the net with open mind, not with suspicion and cynicism. This is all for YOU! Enjoy it and don't ask silly questions. I know I sound self-righteous, but then, I'm just another blathering old nerd...
Pigs do not have any idea how beautiful pearls are
OLAFUR ELIASSAN MADE AN AMILLI SONG!
he should have ended that by saying: ' ..or maybe I just wanted to make a huge fucking waterfall'.
An automated script that perform a task over and over again. Like putting a thousand votes on a video in a few seconds.
If you pool resources through taxation you will have a tragedy of the commons in the tax pool.
I did like waterfalls =)
In this sense libertarianism is definitely (population and new land) expansionary and implicitly natalist / pro-human. Fortunately the advent of better more powerful technologies which flourish under favorable market conditions alleviates resource shortages better than any other system. And precisely because market forces are not impeded the prices of resources accurately reflect scarcity and therefore the need for exploration.
Google seasteading for an example of this in progress.
You too!
Right, but what he SAID was: "...who decides what reality IS..."
No one does.
I agree with you that he is trying to change how we think of reality. But that is not changing reality itself, other than that part of reality that IS our perceptions.
It sounds picky, but it is a pet peeve of mine when people talk imprecisely about reality and perception in such a way that it confuses the two.
GOOD perception reflects reality. Bad philosophy can not distinguish between the two.
art and culture pronounced "art'n culture"
i thought so =/ lol still watched the whole thing for some reason though
Consider a small scale we can understand. The people of a village contribute to defense and pay collectively for a leader to go to other towns and negotiate prices for their products. Anyone who doesn't want to pay isn't part of the village. The village is a country with government.
You still haven't explained how a fire service would work, or high speed broadband etc... wouldn't we be at the mercy of companies? Do you agree at least that we couldn't have got to where we are without government?
Also 1337cole, did you even read my comment. In my first comment I never even mentioned tax dollars only that it was a waste of money - regardless of whether it was publicly or privately funded. It was a waterfall in the middle of a city. It does not give a sense of scale as there are no natural landmarks by which to gauge it. The mountains he spoke of are not present and the scale of buildings is not an apples to apples comparison with mountains in terms of scale. Pointless subjective waste.
No, I claimed that you posting was counter-productive, which is different from claiming that his art is productive.
And I'd have to ask how did you find out that his art was not productive. Did you interview everyone who saw the art and they admitted that they were not moved or touched by it to action. Did you measure his productivity against an artist scale and determine that it was lacking? Did it not conform to some productive art form?
The elderly, the disabled?
Haven't you heard of the tragedy of the commons. There's a shared commons and it's in each herder's self interest to let as many of his cows graze there as he can but if everyone makes this decision which is beneficial to himself then eventually the commons are ruined for all.
If we pool resources through taxes then we can make things that we wouldn't pay for individually because we fear others wouldn't participate equally or we can't see the long term product.
How do you define ownership? If we start again under a completely new system I don't see how the old ideas of ownership apply.
You would be coercing me as a non owner to live in a world where people can 'own' land. Ownership is based on agreement and protect by law (ie: government).
I don't want to be forced into your world of ownership, ie: theft and violence. How can you tell me that I can't live on a piece of land just because you claim to own it?
FIRST to reply to you!
did i miss something?!?!? what is this about?
How is something beautiful supposed to stand aside because its 'expensive'. Where would we be if anything anyone cared about was money? Well anyway, one mans trash is another mans treasure.
I don't think you know what the tragedy of the commons is. The tragedy is that by acting in one's own self interest we actually act against our best interests long term. The commons are destroyed by selfish but rational behaviour.
For example, you may one day have a seriously disabled child and find it beyond your means to look after them. As such it is in your own self interests to make sure society looks after the unfortunates as that may one day be you.
If this guy wants to make a waterfall in New York, that's all fine and good, as long as he's the only person funding it.
There's no reason why the City of New York, the state of New York, or the US government should fund this. The government should be in a money crunch right now, because they are too far in debt.
Yes.
Anything that requires theft -- slavery -- to exist is unproductive by the emergent and fair scale of the market.
You produce something by combining land labour and capital, if the total market value of the product is less than that of the resources used to produce, then you are operating at a loss; in other words you are being unproductive relative to the production others could engage in with those same resources.
I dont enjoy this kind of art but architects do talk in this fashion, and they have a need to rationalize their work and communicate their ideas (usually among themselves) in the planning stages, but like engineering calculations, its not stage material.
I liked being inside Tate Modern though, but his installations need to be experienced. Talking about them or even showing the pictures has no sense or impact what so ever.
Man, it's really not that complicated.
lol, should someone mention photoshop to him??? way more cost effective
There goes the somalia reference. I was waiting for that one.
Can we make clear that somalia is not philosophical anarchy. You call somalia anarchy because it has no powerful central state, but by the same definition I could call the pacific anarchy because all the islands there have no central state -- but they still have states. It is not anarchy, and you know it, and I know it. So lets call a dog a dog.
Well then let's have a referendum and ask people whether they want to abandon public schools, the fire department, ambulances, emergency care, healthcare, buses, tubes... and start from scratch. I'm sure the vast majority would 'voluntarily' choose government. If you don't want government then you can go Somalia.
You get suffering and death when the poor and uneducated aren't protected and their children aren't given opportunities to better themselves as evidenced by history.
1337cole Don't bs me. In addition to the cost of building it; the object was set up on a public infrastructure and located in a major metropolitan city. There were city engineers that had to be consulted. Politicians had to be schmoozed to get it built, safety systems arranged and approved through city bureaucracy... Tell me that every penny was paid for from private donation and I will need for you to show me your sources for your belief of private funding. And show me the return on investment.
Your village would be fascism. If people properly own the land they occupy in the village then their contributions or noncontributions to community funds have no effect on their continued proper ownership of property in that village. What you suggest is raw majority tyranny, or fascism.
Your services would work the way most do now. If you need a taxi, you call one and pay for your trip. Or, alternatively, you could bundle police, fire with insurance. Internet is already private.
You think it would be better if everyone paid companies separately? Say there is a fire in a house next door to you but they weren't a member of a fire service... Or say there was an infectious disease which could be eliminated by a pooling of resources. Does private insurance do a better job than say, the European systems.
Do you really think your system was workable in large populations before the advent of telecommunications?
It's actually the tragedy of the unregulated commons.
Im not a bot,but i gave it one star. crap.
A car made out of ICE?
...
ok..
The God-Bots hate reality!
I did not like the waterfall in New York. I thought it was a waste of effort, money and time. The artist's explanation sounds contrived to justify the silly nature of the piece. If you want to know distance, space and time in a city you simply watch a different kind of flow. Pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic flow. You gain an added functional component with traffic in the sense that time is not just measured by a fixed waterfall rate but by a variable traffic flow rate yielding time of day.
Is it just me or is this guy just talking a load of nonsense?
Fjollet...
#University #Academy AMERICA - VIA PHYSICIST ION MURGU FROM OHIO, USA BROUGHT TO HUMANITY UNIVERSAL TWO FUNDAMENTALS INTO 2015 SEPTEMBER 24 .
1- Lost Fundamental.
2. Fermat's Last Theorem Fundamental.
{Maybe My name is Disorder, but I blessed those two Fundamentals by 40 years of work and not to Fermat's Last Theorem but to bless our Dependencies [(1/r)^2- what is important in ? all.] }
Scientist's YOU KNOW Fermat's Last Theorem now is FUNDAMENTAL IN SCIENCE and will brought a lot on?
#FermatLastTheorem #Math #Science #ScienceNews #News #EarthProudDay #IonMurguCirclesParadox #FermatMurguTheorem #EulerMurguEquation1Equal1
Fermat's Last Theorem , was SOLVED INTO SCIENCE SAINT DAY - 2015 SEPTEMBER 24 - BY AN AMERICAN PHYSICIST - ION MURGU FROM OHIO, USA.
Because '93 - '94, '95 PROOF was a common mistake , or INTENDED ONE (nobody know) the author published it until now into an allusive mode, because the Method Fermat-Murgu Impossible Equations remain a certain proof for- IS A NEW METHOD, NEVER USED AND AS YOU SEE HEAVY TO UNDERSTAND - MAYBE YET NOBODY UNDERSTOOD IT.
Fermat-Murgu Natural Solution and The Beauty - EULER - MURGU EQUATION 1=1 - ARE coming to Certify it.
I NAMED IT {EULER - MURGU EQUATION 1=1} AS RESPECT AND GRATITUDE FOR EULER - A GIANT OF MATH - EVEN IF EULER HIMSELF WAS BLINDED BY {(e)-iPI +1=0} Euler - God Equation, and to understand it luck for Ion Murgu Circles Paradox - THE BEAUTY OF PARADOXES - AND Pythagorean Prime Numbers which can say Define the raze of "Perfect Circles".
www.climaticdisorder.com/
Always sad to see botting in action :/
this just did not do it for me. but then i dont "get" a lot of art. just not my thing...
What the hell happened? A bot?
Why are all of you old nerds blathering about your own agendas?!?! Hasn't anyone noticed that this talk is just bullcrap? This guy is just trying to validate his failed life as an expencive fake artist, and it makes me sick. I have no idea what he's talking about -especially when he's trying to explain why his work is important, because it isn't.
One of those guys too full of himself to being able to convey his ideas in an understandable way to people who hasn't been working with the subject for several years. Some people just can't communicate effectivally, but somehow thinks their own needs to sound intelligent/deep in their own ears, trumphs the audiances needs to get the message...
Even you 3rd
3rd
You do realize most of the folks sitting there are interested and knowledgable about what he's talking about...right?
You can't just buy tickets to hear them talk, you have to be invited. And they don't invite idiots to fill seats.
Spambotted.
At 2:00: NO ONE decides what reality is!
Reality is what it already is!
Our perceptions of reality change and differ from that of others, but reality itself is just what it is.
This guy has a bad metaphysics.
If his foundational philosophy is messed up, then that reduces his ability to do things in the world.
Hey, Ted. Has this video really been votebotted? :( Sad attempt.
He should lay off the LSD.
This has nothing to do with art!! How could you possibly relate this nonsense to art?
this smells
a video about space and light, and if you read the comment section you'll think we are adressing obama's healthcare plan, darfur, somalia and what not.
some people just made it a skill to just sidetrack every single comment section on TED.
the topic is interesting but I can see why its not thrilling if you are not passionated about the issue at hand,.
Oh, how stupid one have to be to votebot TEDtalk...
Anyhow, it's quite good , maybe NOW RUclips will do something about those damn voteboters.
second!
What I mean is that he's boring as all hell and I couldn't even finish watching it. nobody should care about the speed of falling water putting the New York skyline in perspective, because it's just expencive art that serves no valuable purpose. **I don't know what person would find this talk the least bit interesting, but good luck to you.
Argh, bots.
An overly excited Christian, of course.