School of Tomorrow - Revision history

WikiSysop at 13:15, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T13:15:38Z

WikiSysop at 12:14, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T12:14:22Z

WikiSysop at 12:07, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T12:07:03Z

WikiSysop: /* Public Art */

2014-07-16T10:55:17Z

‎Public Art

WikiSysop at 10:49, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T10:49:54Z

WikiSysop: /* Public Art */

2014-07-16T10:35:31Z

‎Public Art

WikiSysop at 10:34, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T10:34:51Z

WikiSysop at 10:34, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T10:34:16Z

WikiSysop at 10:23, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T10:23:39Z

WikiSysop at 09:45, 16 July 2014

2014-07-16T09:45:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:15, 16 July 2014
Line 54:		Line 54:
	* rotterdam collects public art which was rejected		* rotterdam collects public art which was rejected
	* turd on the plaza		* turd on the plaza
		+
		+	== Ideas ==
		+
		+	* Smelting is a form of extractive metallurgy; its main use is to produce a metal from its ore.
		+
		+	* Digital psychometry: a form of extra-sensory perception characterized by the claimed ability to make relevant associations from an object of unknown history by making physical contact with that object - actualising possibilities beyond our current abilities of cognition. augmentation of human consciousness. metabiological. Could we have sculptures which treat humans (currently the subject) as information objects and the object in the street is instead the subject?
		+
		+	* http://www.mi.sanu.ac.rs/vismath/barrallo1/ - proposal of a taxonomy for the classification of Mathematical Sculpture - The only approach to classify Mathematical sculpture we know is based on the construction materials used, since they confer the works some geometrical properties. However, this typology does not permit to include all types of works…
		+
		+	* Hakin Bey - Temporary Autonomous Zone
		+	# Pirate Utopias
		+	# Waiting for the Revolution
		+	# The Psychotopology of Everyday Life
		+	# The Net and the Web
		+	# "Gone to Croatan"
		+	# Music as an Organizational Principle
		+	# The Will To Power as Disappearance
		+	# Ratholes in the Babylon of Information

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 * How would radical financial transparency affect the financial system if at all? If individuals were to publicly share their own expenditures and investments (like in QS), would this affect choices made by companies and individuals?
-*A financial instrument is a tradable asset of any kind.
+*A financial instrument is a '''tradable''' asset of any kind.
-Examples of types of financial instruments:
+* Financial Performance / Financial Instruments - used to
-# shares in a company
+* Accountancy of Labor for Financial Jobs
 == Public Art ==
@@ Line 37: / Line 39: @@
 * PERCENT FOR ART: Some governments actively encourage the creation of public art, for example, budgeting for artworks in new buildings by implementing a Percent for Art policy. 1% of the construction cost for art is a standard, but the amount varies widely from place to place.
 * London spending on public arts 15 times higher than rest of UK - “Public spending on the arts is heavily skewed towards London, with people in the capital benefiting to the tune of £69 per head compared with £4.58 in other English regions, a new report suggests” - Source: http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2013/oct/31/public-arts-spending-london-15-times-greater
 * The report proposes a new national investment programme of £600m – money made available by limiting London's access to lottery cash – that would, over the five years of a parliament, have responsibility for investment in new cultural production outside London. The authors suggest one problem is that most decisions taken on public funding of the arts are taken by the "centre" – as in the government and Arts Council England. That accounts for 75% of funding decisions, whereas the equivalent is 13% in Germany, 15% in Spain, 36% in Spain and 51% in France.
 * [http://www.artsprofessional.co.uk/sites/artsprofessional.co.uk/files/rebalancing_our_cultural_capital.pdf Rebalacing our Cultural capital] - "“We share a vision of a ‘polycentric’ and internationally networked Britain of many cultures with autonomously dispersed resources for artistic and cultural production supported by and celebrated  in a capital city that ‘irrigates rather than drains’ in the arts as in other areas of national life.”
 * [http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2014/05/31/a-map-of-londons-newest-outdoor-public-art/ Map of London's Outdoor Public Art]
 === Tilted Arc (A case of public art and art law) ===

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:07, 16 July 2014
Line 21:		Line 21:

	* How would radical financial transparency affect the financial system if at all? If individuals were to publicly share their own expenditures and investments (like in QS), would this affect choices made by companies and individuals?		* How would radical financial transparency affect the financial system if at all? If individuals were to publicly share their own expenditures and investments (like in QS), would this affect choices made by companies and individuals?
		+
		+	*A financial instrument is a tradable asset of any kind.
		+
		+	Examples of types of financial instruments:
		+	# shares in a company
		+	cash of any currency
		+	gold, oil and other commodities
		+	options
		+	futures
		+	CFDs

	== Public Art ==		== Public Art ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:55, 16 July 2014
Line 35:		Line 35:
	* Interesting story of Richard Serra's Tilted Arc, commissioned by the United States General Services Administration Arts-in-Architecture program for the Foley Federal Plaza in front of the Jacob Javits Federal Building in Manhattan, New York City. "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes." Those who worked in the area found the sculpture extremely disruptive to their daily routines, and within months the work had driven over 1300 bureaucratic employees in the greater metro area to sign a petition for its removal. The trial involving Tilted Arc is cited as the most notorious public sculpture controversy in the history of art law.		* Interesting story of Richard Serra's Tilted Arc, commissioned by the United States General Services Administration Arts-in-Architecture program for the Foley Federal Plaza in front of the Jacob Javits Federal Building in Manhattan, New York City. "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes." Those who worked in the area found the sculpture extremely disruptive to their daily routines, and within months the work had driven over 1300 bureaucratic employees in the greater metro area to sign a petition for its removal. The trial involving Tilted Arc is cited as the most notorious public sculpture controversy in the history of art law.
	* It was argued in the trial that the work would "run the risk of deflecting explosions into government buildings opposite and impeded adequate surveillance of the area beyond." A public hearing was held on the subject of the sculpture in March 1985, with 122 people testifying in favor of keeping the piece, and a mere 58 in favor of removing it. Notable speakers arguing in favor of the sculpture included Philip Glass, Keith Haring, and Claes Oldenburg. Artists, art historians, and even a psychiatrist testified for the sculpture to remain in its location. Local workers argued for removal: one person stated: "Every time I pass this so-called sculpture I just can’t believe it ... The General Services Administration, or whoever approved this, this goes beyond the realm of stupidity. This goes into even worse than insanity. I think an insane person would say, ‘How crazy can you be to pay $175,000 for that rusted metal wall?' You would have to be insane-more than insane." A jury of five voted 4–1 to remove the sculpture. The decision was appealed by Serra, leading to several years of litigation in the courts, but the sculpture was dismantled and placed in storage by federal workers on the night of March 15, 1989.		* It was argued in the trial that the work would "run the risk of deflecting explosions into government buildings opposite and impeded adequate surveillance of the area beyond." A public hearing was held on the subject of the sculpture in March 1985, with 122 people testifying in favor of keeping the piece, and a mere 58 in favor of removing it. Notable speakers arguing in favor of the sculpture included Philip Glass, Keith Haring, and Claes Oldenburg. Artists, art historians, and even a psychiatrist testified for the sculpture to remain in its location. Local workers argued for removal: one person stated: "Every time I pass this so-called sculpture I just can’t believe it ... The General Services Administration, or whoever approved this, this goes beyond the realm of stupidity. This goes into even worse than insanity. I think an insane person would say, ‘How crazy can you be to pay $175,000 for that rusted metal wall?' You would have to be insane-more than insane." A jury of five voted 4–1 to remove the sculpture. The decision was appealed by Serra, leading to several years of litigation in the courts, but the sculpture was dismantled and placed in storage by federal workers on the night of March 15, 1989.
		+
		+	* rotterdam collects public art which was rejected
		+	* turd on the plaza

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 All bitcoins you earn as 'income' are taxable. If you make a transaction with bitcoin (eg buying a coffee) you may be making a capital gain depending on the price of the bitcoin when you bought it and when you used it to buy something, therefore it is taxable. You are not taxed if you bought Bitcoins or any crypto-currencies with your own money.
-== Co-evolution ==
+== Co-education / Co-evolution ==
 [http://kk.org/outofcontrol/ch5-e.html Kevin Kelly's Out of Control]:

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 * [http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2014/05/31/a-map-of-londons-newest-outdoor-public-art/ Map of London's Outdoor Public Art]
 * Interesting story of Richard Serra's Tilted Arc, commissioned by the United States General Services Administration Arts-in-Architecture program for the Foley Federal Plaza in front of the Jacob Javits Federal Building in Manhattan, New York City. "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes." Those who worked in the area found the sculpture extremely disruptive to their daily routines, and within months the work had driven over 1300 bureaucratic employees in the greater metro area to sign a petition for its removal. The trial involving Tilted Arc is cited as the most notorious public sculpture controversy in the history of art law.
+* It was argued in the trial that the work would "run the risk of deflecting explosions into government buildings opposite and impeded adequate surveillance of the area beyond." A public hearing was held on the subject of the sculpture in March 1985, with 122 people testifying in favor of keeping the piece, and a mere 58 in favor of removing it. Notable speakers arguing in favor of the sculpture included Philip Glass, Keith Haring, and Claes Oldenburg. Artists, art historians, and even a psychiatrist testified for the sculpture to remain in its location. Local workers argued for removal: one person stated: "Every time I pass this so-called sculpture I just can’t believe it ... The General Services Administration, or whoever approved this, this goes beyond the realm of stupidity. This goes into even worse than insanity. I think an insane person would say, ‘How crazy can you be to pay $175,000 for that rusted metal wall?' You would have to be insane-more than insane." A jury of five voted 4–1 to remove the sculpture. The decision was appealed by Serra, leading to several years of litigation in the courts, but the sculpture was dismantled and placed in storage by federal workers on the night of March 15, 1989.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:34, 16 July 2014
Line 32:		Line 32:
	* [http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2014/05/31/a-map-of-londons-newest-outdoor-public-art/ Map of London's Outdoor Public Art]		* [http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2014/05/31/a-map-of-londons-newest-outdoor-public-art/ Map of London's Outdoor Public Art]

−	* Interesting story of Richard Serra's Tilted Arc, commissioned by the United States General Services Administration Arts-in-Architecture program for the Foley Federal Plaza in front of the Jacob Javits Federal Building in Manhattan, New York City. "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes." Those who worked in the area found the sculpture extremely disruptive to their daily routines, and within months the work had driven over 1300 bureaucratic employees in the greater metro area to sign a petition for its removal. The trial involving Tilted Arc is cited as the most notorious public sculpture controversy in the history of art law.~~[7]~~ It was argued in the trial that the work would "run the risk of deflecting explosions into government buildings opposite and impeded adequate surveillance of the area beyond."~~[2]~~ A public hearing was held on the subject of the sculpture in March 1985, with 122 people testifying in favor of keeping the piece, and a mere 58 in favor of removing it. Notable speakers arguing in favor of the sculpture included Philip Glass, Keith Haring, and Claes Oldenburg. Artists, art historians, and even a psychiatrist testified for the sculpture to remain in its location.~~[3]~~ Local workers argued for removal: one person stated: "Every time I pass this so-called sculpture I just can’t believe it ... The General Services Administration, or whoever approved this, this goes beyond the realm of stupidity. This goes into even worse than insanity. I think an insane person would say, ‘How crazy can you be to pay $175,000 for that rusted metal wall?' You would have to be insane-more than insane."~~[3]~~ A jury of five voted 4–1 to remove the sculpture. The decision was appealed by Serra, leading to several years of litigation in the courts, but the sculpture was dismantled and placed in storage by federal workers on the night of March 15, 1989.	+	* Interesting story of Richard Serra's Tilted Arc, commissioned by the United States General Services Administration Arts-in-Architecture program for the Foley Federal Plaza in front of the Jacob Javits Federal Building in Manhattan, New York City. "The viewer becomes aware of himself and of his movement through the plaza. As he moves, the sculpture changes. Contraction and expansion of the sculpture result from the viewer's movement. Step by step the perception not only of the sculpture but of the entire environment changes." Those who worked in the area found the sculpture extremely disruptive to their daily routines, and within months the work had driven over 1300 bureaucratic employees in the greater metro area to sign a petition for its removal. The trial involving Tilted Arc is cited as the most notorious public sculpture controversy in the history of art law.
		+
		+	It was argued in the trial that the work would "run the risk of deflecting explosions into government buildings opposite and impeded adequate surveillance of the area beyond." A public hearing was held on the subject of the sculpture in March 1985, with 122 people testifying in favor of keeping the piece, and a mere 58 in favor of removing it. Notable speakers arguing in favor of the sculpture included Philip Glass, Keith Haring, and Claes Oldenburg. Artists, art historians, and even a psychiatrist testified for the sculpture to remain in its location. Local workers argued for removal: one person stated: "Every time I pass this so-called sculpture I just can’t believe it ... The General Services Administration, or whoever approved this, this goes beyond the realm of stupidity. This goes into even worse than insanity. I think an insane person would say, ‘How crazy can you be to pay $175,000 for that rusted metal wall?' You would have to be insane-more than insane." A jury of five voted 4–1 to remove the sculpture. The decision was appealed by Serra, leading to several years of litigation in the courts, but the sculpture was dismantled and placed in storage by federal workers on the night of March 15, 1989.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 == Cryptocurrencies ==
@@ Line 23: / Line 24: @@
 == Public Art ==
-* In mexico, artists can pay tax through artworks - since 1957, artists can participate in a Pago en Especie (Payment in Kind) program. If an artist sells up to five pieces in one calendar year, the artist donates one of equal value to the state. If the artist sells six to eight pieces, the artist donates two. The sliding scale continues until an artist gives a maximum of six pieces. ‘Pay your taxes in artwork. Keep on painting.’ The art works are in government offices as well as public buildings.”A rotating committee of seven artists and curators evaluates proposed donations to see whether they fairly represent the body of work of a given artist. “More than evaluate the monetary value of a work, the experts decide if the work is representative of the artist’s oeuvre,” Lopez Beltran said.
+* In Mexico, artists can pay tax through artworks - since 1957, artists can participate in a Pago en Especie (Payment in Kind) program. If an artist sells up to five pieces in one calendar year, the artist donates one of equal value to the state. If the artist sells six to eight pieces, the artist donates two. The sliding scale continues until an artist gives a maximum of six pieces. ‘Pay your taxes in artwork. Keep on painting.’ The art works are in government offices as well as public buildings.”A rotating committee of seven artists and curators evaluates proposed donations to see whether they fairly represent the body of work of a given artist. “More than evaluate the monetary value of a work, the experts decide if the work is representative of the artist’s oeuvre,” Lopez Beltran said.