Hi, please

Category Archives: 1-travelogue

Concluding Post – How much *TIME SPENT ON*?





This week in my research:









I love traveling. I am mostly up to go anywhere.





Any travel suggestions or experiences including train?



Individual vs Collective Freedom




Not So Fast, Curtis!: Digging Deeper into Game Theory







Smile (or Not)- You Are Being Watched!

Do you think that you are an anonymous nobody, or do you secretly elaborate strategies to finally become famous and divert public attention on you? You are wrong! In fact, let me tell you that you are already all over the place! Especially since you have become a NYU student. There is no need to participate in Big Brother or other television reality shows; a slow stroll from Washington Square to the sports center is enough. My latest experiment will prove you why. Unfortunately (or fortunately for you), my project „Zero Camera“ has desperately failed.

Adam Curtis’ documentary has addressed a fundamental question I was asking myself for the last few weeks. What price has freedom? If we want to preserve and protect our so-called free and open society, is it inevitable that we will have to give up large parts of our privacy and personal rights? The failed terrorist bombing of the Northwest airplane on Christmas day has once again shown how vulnerable our society is. More important, it has made clear that fear has become the governing rationale of our living-together. I am shocked with was ease and speed civil liberties are revalued and curtailed in the name of national security. Although the efficiency and legitimacy of the draconian security measures adopted after the 9/11 events have been questioned by the public in the last few years, after Christmas, invasive „preventive“ actions have been taken without a blink. Full-body scanners will soon be installed in every airport. For now, this new measure still provokes outcry and is heatedly discussed, but within little time it will be largely accepted – as it occurred with the security/surveillance cameras systems in the past.

To make it clear, I don’t want to blame terrorism as the sole reason for this situation. In the last decades, there has been a unbreakable trend towards the „securization“ of our society. Private security companies have mushroomed everywhere on the globe, especially in industrialized countries, and became an integral part of our daily life. Today, it is completely normal- and even regarded as necessary- that surveillance cameras accompany us 24/7. But how true is this statement? Are video cameras really ubiquitous, at least in the cities? I asked myself when I was filmed in my daily life. Sure, I knew that banks and stores use video cameras, and in the subway I also had spotted several models. But around the university campus, it couldn’t be so bad, could it? Walking on University Place, I started to direct my look into the air, and suddenly realized that I was walking on a red carpet. On only eight blocks, I discovered ten cameras!

That is when I wanted to make an experiment. Could I get from Bobst Library to the Sports Center Palladium without being taped? With the help of i-See , a web-based application elaborated by the Institute for Applied Technology, I calculated my „Zero Camera“ route to trick the system, and find a way for not being taped on my way. The plan seemed simple: after some detours and small side-streets, I would arrive at my final destination on 14th street without being videotaped. With the city map in my hand, I left the library full excitement.

Half a bloc later, my first deception. Kimmel Center. Four cameras on one corner! Even worse, a quick inquiry with the security guard revealed that the building has approximately ten outdoor cameras. On Thompson street, the situation was similar. Clearly, i-See needed a huge update! Therefore, I changed my plan again, and decided to count all cameras on my „Zero Camera“ route. About twenty minutes later, and a nice walk in the East Village (by the way, the church at 10th street with 2nd Ave has a very nice garden!), the result was stunning: I discovered over 25 cameras. On practically every segment of my route my un-trained eye had found video cameras. The real number must be much higher, as a lot of cameras are hidden as lamps, and aren’t easy to detect.

According to a report published in 2006 by the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) called “Who’s Watching? Video Camera Surveillance in New York City and the Need for Public Oversight,” the number of video sur-veillance cameras has skyrocketed in the last ten years. Whereas in 1998, over 2300 cameras were „visible from street level in Manhattan,“ in 2005 almost the same amount was counted in the area of Greenwich Village and SoHo only. Five years later, the current statistics must be even higher.

Of course, the purpose of video camera systems isn’t to turn common citizen into non-stop filmed celebrities. The proponents of video surveillance systems claim that the use of cameras deters crime, and enhances public safety. On the other hand, critics denounce that this technology undermines fundamental civil rights like the right to privacy, speech, expression and association. For example, the NYCLU has reported abuses of police monitoring powers in this regard, and raised awareness about the discriminating practice of racial profiling. The New York based performance collective called Surveillance Camera Players also protests against public video cameras, and makes a direct parallel to George Orwell’s surveillance society depicted in 1984.

The question is if these measures are effective and make us safer. But more important: Are the invasion of our privacy and the detriment of our personal rights the price of security? Do we have to be unfree in order to be free? In the end, it is a choice about what society we want. In my opinion, we are heading in the complete wrong direction.

Freedom Isn’t Free

I often think about the actions of how we treat one another. From the simple laughs on TMZ.com to the killings of innocent people in war, the human being is constantly joyed by another persons sorrow.

Adam Curtis’ “The Trap” is a realistic documentary that makes you think about how we as human beings betray one other on a day to day basis. And while we embed trust in each other through friends, family or common acquaintances we in fact learn from “The Trap” that there are preconceived motives in almost everything we do.

The saying “Freedom Isn’t Free” kept coming to mind as I was watching this film. The reason I chose to compare and contrast this saying is because ones freedom is always reliant on laws and individuals that merit what we do and don’t do. I believe what we are told though government and theory often manipulate to underlying meanings that are out of our control. Thus, after we are told one thing, most likely something else always happens. This brings a sensible argument to how we have fallen into this false sense of freedom or “trap”. A sense that has led to the rise of social inequality, the endless attempts to establish democracy in the middle east, and the war on terror in Britain, Europe and America.

I was intrigued by  Nash’s, “Fuck You Buddy” approach and how it easily relates in any situation. Though this film focus primarily on the betrayal of government and politics this approach is seen in everyday activity. After I watched this film, I realized much how much of savages we really are.  While some may disagree, it is evident that someone is always out to get you whether it be your government, your best friend or your credit card company. And in many instances, you are left without a choice. Consequently, a choice that limits your state of freedom i.e. Freedom Isn’t Free.

It goes on to how the rhetoric of freedom has been used by revolutionaries to justify violence, by the neo-cons to justify “shock therapy” in Eastern Europe and more recently in Iraq, with horrific consequences. To easily relate this film to today, we can look at the most recent red alert in Britain and how this affects the world hence the term, “global fear”. Global fear being how we as individuals create scarcity in one isolated region and it’s effect on the world. I am currently in Los Angeles for the weekend and just yesterday did I notice that upon leaving JFK I was put through a second security check at the gate right before boarding my flight. I would go in depth further on ones persons control over another however I have a feeling I can bring this up in a posting another time.

Finally this is one of the most thought-provoking and intelligent films of recent times. How the world would be so different if only we thought through things before acting upon what we “actually do”.

TV, the Tyrant – Travelogue-1

TV, the Tyrant






Protestors burn TV






Travelogue 1 – The Trap/Adam Curtis

The Trap

This film brought up several points that most of us do think about subconsciously but never act on. The concept of people monitoring and strategizing against each other is very true in a humanistic way. Our first level of consciousness doesn’t believe in such a tactic but if we were to analyze our own minds in depth we would mind that it is the survival of the fittest in essence. The author’s idea of political control I believe is quite accurate in the sense that this type of control does prevent individualism and freedom.

Nash’s idea of “Fuck Your Buddy” or “Game Theory” struck me as something that can be applied to any situation that relates to two parties. In your own daily life you can see that those who are cut throat and not care for the outcome of others seem to succeed more. Now this opinion can be called into question by many, but it is a fact that if you are too nice to your enemy they will attack and you will lose.  Possessing a common courtesy for others can get you “Trapped.” Everyone should have the ability to pursue their own goals.  Nash proved that through this system of selfishness and suspicion a balance or sense of equilibrium can be created. If we were all to cooperate and become slaves to the government, it would actually be more dangerous for society. Each of us adjust to one another’s strategies, and we are all trying to gain our own personal advantage against each other.

Another part of the film I found interesting and was completely unaware of was the attack of the elite psychiatrists. This group of people was trampled on simply by one study of 8 fake patients. I was stunned to find that because they all stated they thought of the same word and acted normal they were all diagnosed with some mental illness. It made me doubt how dangerous the power of these doctors were.  As the documentary states, the categories in psychiatrity did change into a series of checklists that one can self diagnosis and calculate through numbers. I don’t personally believe this is entirely accurate either, it would cause an epidemic of people who would constantly find something wrong with themselves. A computer should not have the ability to calculate if one is suffering from depression. The concept of the checklists also led to dangerous consequences. A medicated society on anti depressants would make humans be just as the market is, a system of numbers that is automated and robotic.

The idea of freedom in the west – was deeply rooted in the paranoia and basis that develop in the Cold War – which led to corruption and inequality. We are really the lonely individuals that the cold war scientists had developed.

The attempt to liberate people has actually led to a system of complete control which might not be the type of people humanity may need. It will cause a dramatic collapse of social mobility, there will be great distinctions between social classes. There may be a reason why the middle east rejects the ideas of the western idea of democracy and freedom.

The idea that politicians that served the public was impossible. This documentary makes an interesting point in that one person cannot represent society or the “public good.” A politician that serves the public can only make decisions for himself, and represent himself and what benefit himself, not others as a collective. It is better to base our society on the market , similar to having a voting system, the author is documentary believe this is the only way one could have freedom.  I found the idea of market democracy to be very interesting because it is a system that actual works because it is based on what the people want and are buying into. It is better for the people and their interests run the market and then in return the economy will flourish.

Chagnon’s experiment was also very intriguing in development of models of humans beings, based on genes that guide people or “codes” or “instructions” that make people who are alike, act the same way. DNA is can explain why certain people act the way they do. People who have similar genetic makes up tend to gravitate towards defending one another more. This I personally believe is just a simple rule of human nature, but through Chagnon’s experiment and mathematical theory he was able to prove this as true.

Here is an interesting video I watched on the Naro – it actually elaborates on Chagnon’s research as well:

World without meaning, instead of re instilling freedom in the western thought, they have stripped it from us. It would be want Berlin would state as the transition from negative liberty to positive liberty which was questioned by the Cold War scientists.

Reagan’s policy on the Sandinistas was argued and questioned because we participated in giving weapons to Nicaragua supplement the global war on terror which the United States was against. Through the idea of “Perception Management” the American people could be convinced that the Sandinistas would threaten the American people and that we were left with no other choice but to retaliate.

These were my thoughts on the 3 videos – Enjoy!

New Media : the answer to The Trap (Adam Curtis 2007)!

I found Curtis’ documentary interested to watch (despite its length and old fashioned way of filming!). The way it questions the western idea of Freedom is very relevant to the global context we are living in these days.

The concept of “negative Freedom” emerged from the Cold War when people were convinced they had to protect them from the communists who tried to deprive them from their freedom. But even after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the failure of communism the negative freedom did not turn into a “positive freedom”. Freedom is not promoted in itself, it is always defined as something that has to be protected from an enemy. Even after the Cold War politicians and powerful corporation are keeping people in the idea that they have an enemy. It used to be communists, now it is terrorists.

Governments maintain an atmosphere of paranoia to achieve control over people. They believe that politicians are protecting them from huge threats such as bombings etc. Therefore people will not criticize or rebel themselves against it. According to Curtis, politicians seem to have interest in creating enemies.

We could think of Curtis’ documentary as very pessimistic. And it is obviously. Yet I disagree with Alexandra’s closure “Great job complaining about all the things wrong in the world – but that’s really only half of the job”. By pinpointing what’s wrong we are lead to answers. What if the development were a way of escaping the control that politicians have gain over us. It might be the tool to retrieve a positive freedom. The role of Twitter in 2009 Iran Revolution is a great example of the hope we could in the New Media.

YouTube Preview Image

Contrary to “the Invisible Hand” of economist Adam Smith, we could think of the New Media as the tool which forces people to stop focus on their personal interest and pushes them into taking into account the others. This reminds me of the movie the Lives of others, where the agent of the Stasi takes who is supposed to put a suspicious couple unde

“I know my Calculus: U+Me=Us”

For another class, I’ve been reading Horkheimer and Adorno’s philosophical treatise, Dialectic of Enlightenment. Certainly not my first choice in reading material, and absolutely not the most engrossing or lucid of texts, but I found its critique of the Enlightenment ideal of ‘man’s logical mind triumphant over nature’ to be a useful supplement when considering The Trap.

Without getting too deep into the argument, the basic premise of the book is that the Enlightenment was all about conquering man’s fear of the unknown by attempting to quantify and qualify everything. The goal was for man to become a completely logical being, whose actions and reactions spring out of rational self-interest; as philosopher Baruch Spinoza said, “the endeavor of preserving oneself is the first and only basis of virtue.”

Sound familiar?

Like the creators of The Trap, Horkheimer and Adorno are much better at offering a critique of this mindset than deploying any positive arguments, but one line in particular stood out to me as an “aha!” moment. They write:

“The reduction of thought to a mathematical apparatus condemns the world to be its own measure.”

Very Shakespearean; let’s contemplate.

What they’re saying, in short, is that reducing all of human life—inner- and outer- —to numbers and equations is painfully limiting, and completely rejects the possibility of miracle. And not necessarily ‘miracle’ in a religious sense, though they are gesturing toward the great Unknowns of existence that often becomes staples of religion.

Rather, they are speaking of miracle in terms of surprise, when people do things that defy expectation and rationality and all obvious laws of nature. When men and women run into burning buildings to save a stranger; when people travel into earthquake zones at the risk of life and limb to help rebuild; or, perhaps, when RAND secretaries refuse to turn on each other in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Spinoza argued that miracles are events simply following laws of whose rules we’re unaware, but that’s pretty childish logic. What has fueled thought for centuries is that there are so many intangibles to human nature that to simplify it into a matter of numbers vastly underestimates the species—whether we be animal, machine, or something other.

This sounds rather maudlin indeed, and surprisingly idealistic for someone who considers herself a cynic. But I find it ironic that those who embody the great unknown of genius (which, it should be noted, originated as a term for a person’s guiding spirit or fortune), like John Nash, are the same men and women who treat the human mind as if it can be contained by a set of equations with predictable results. Humans aren’t so easy to pin down, as witnessed by the fact that in The Trap, every single attempt at government has, in one way or another, been a giant fail, and even history’s most brilliant minds have been unable to come up with a proper and lasting solution.

Is this post yet another critique with no solution? Probably. All I can suggest is to take comfort in the little, ridiculous miracles that new media has put at our fingertips, because, if nothing else, YouTube is an archive full of people acting irrationally.

YouTube Preview Image