A few notes and links to do with mutual credit Networks. (not the credit union things..)
there’s another part – where the links are. (didn’t think there will be so much text in these notes..)
One thing at the Back of my front mind comes as follows:
* Art even in a basic – maybe materialistic informulation, practice from meta as a noetic fluctuativities, is the speediest exchange in the cosmos. The fact that upon reading “Art even in a basic – maybe materialistic informulation, practice from meta as a noetic fluctuativities” – you went something to the tune of: “WTF?!?!”, comes as an illustration of the speed we are talking about. The exchange among you, the text, it’s language, mode of sharing, and me – comes instantaneous as soon as a witness comes along. As I type, what’s being made comes as an energy, a fluctiating stuff, that’s ready for exchange. An exchangable that’s being pickup by a witnessing reader. The text gave you X (eg Art even in a basic – maybe materialistic informulation, practice from meta as a noetic fluctuativities), in exchange of your something like WTF?!?!?. The hope, ofcourse, moves towards spaces away from the WTF kinda exchange. However, the exchange was done. (give me a shout if you want to discuss that assertion.)
* We can consider art history, even in the vulgar sense of image making, as a practice of exchange production. Exchanges between groups of humans, between rulers and their dominions, and so on. You wear such and such a mask – and Boom – in the speed of light/thought – you turned from a mere mortal to a goddess from a new cosmos! A godessNess that instantaneously exchanges their qualities with, for example, humans taking part in that particular mask oriented event. (for a lack of a better term.. Apologies!!)
* We have a history of number making. How do we think of and then scribe/draw/make numbers. A history of failed attempts which, i think, illustrates that the writing itself has to come in correct composition with the space that’s being written. Hindu/Arabian numbers are More correct than Roman numbers. Their compositional correctness comes via the ways in which the H/A numerical can allow things which R numbers either can not or struggle with. (There are Mayan numbers as well that perhaps are better than all others, however that’s for a different space)
Sometimes humans Do stuff slightly wrongly and it takes many attempts to Get the practice correctly, that the practice comes free from human imposed limitations and orientation.
I think we can see that in terms of religions, large groups organisations, science, and i think are yet to experience in art.
With the above in Mind:::
In Nick Land’s text about the philosophy and bitcoin, when NL talks of stuff in the range of Doing Money Correctly – the question of correct exchanges came knocking in connection to the types of numerical exchange structures, systems and practices we currently use.
((NL claims Bitcoin is at long last the correct way to do money.))
* How to exchange that which refuses numericalisation, that which refuses values, while keeping society anarchic? (ie, the UK, for example, has a system of honour which comes an a quality exchange. The X human did Z quality (or paid to be said to have provided Z quality), and the monarch produces an honor that’s used later on to extract value by X. This is done in hierarchy, and to keep a particular hierarchy operating. I think that since qualities are anarchic, one offers certain qualities without a case – they just can not help not to. It’s a flat terrain in that sense.)[perhaps interesting to note that this might come as a useful illustration of how qualities are harder to do than values. It’s curious since values are simpler to prove than qualities. Easier to pass an exam than producing a series of texts throughout a given period on a given subject.]