1. Mandelbrot created the first ever "theory of roughness" and he saw "roughness" in the shapes of mountains, coastlines and river basins; the structures of plants, blood vessels and lungs; the clustering of galaxies. His personal quest was to create a mathematical formula to measure the overall "roughness" of such objects in nature.

2. To Entangle - to cause something to become caught in something such as a net or ropes.


3.'Fishermen' and the gender-neutral 'fishers' are the most common terms used in the English language to describe people who fish. While the gender-neutral term 'fisher' is more inclusive, it is far from universally accepted, particularly by women and men in the North American fishing industry.

4.- "Only breaks or interruptions in other words, disorder "— 'might provide something new, which is to say, specific information." - Margarte Pratchke, The Islands of Benoit Mandelbrot — Fractals, Chaos, and the Materiality of Thinking: Seeing Order in Disorder p 98.  

Pattern 1

Sensible & Analytical Patterns 1.1

5. Wikis can be used as a great platform for understanding, with the spirit of multiple voices coming together. It is important to keep in mind, however, that Wikipedia has received some critique about its lack of diversity.

Fractal 1.2 - Patterns, Perception, and an Interference with Nature

6. Jan von Breveren, The Islands of Benoit Mandelbrot -- Fractals, Chaos, and the Materiality of Thinking: 'The Fractal View: Nature in Mandelbrot's Geometry'' p116.

7. Arthur Boetes: "A fractal is an object that displays self-similarity; it contains parts that are similar to an object as a whole. This can often be accomplished by making use of recursion; repeatedly using the output of a function as its input. "

8. References to picture A, a fungus-fractal-type growing.

9. Douglas Hofstadter, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An eternal Golden braid: Mum and Gödel chapter IX p252

The Pattern Ontology 1.3

10. Ontology is the ground and ontologies are forms. Forms cannot exist on their own, because forms didn’t create themselves, so that it is rather the ground that carries forms. Yuk Hui On the Existence of a Digital Object: Ontogenesis: Ontologies versus Ontology p34.

11. Concerning existence, we can articulate two orders of magnitude: ontologies and Ontology. Ontology comes from the Greek words on and logos. On is the present participle of einai, meaning “to be.” Logos comes from legein, meaning “to talk about,”or as Heidegger says, “to lay down in front of.” Yuk Hui On the Existence of a Digital Object: Ontogenesis: Ontologies versus Ontology p33.

12. Richard Tuttle, Indonesian textiles: Variety of Subject (13).

13. Referring to pictures of performance work - "Walking in Circles"

14. Reductionism is an approach to understanding the nature of complex things by reducing them to the interactions of their parts, or to simpler or more fundamental things.

Echo 1.4

15. Interface - a connection between two pieces of electronic equipment, or between a person and a computer

16. UI, UX - abbreviation for User interface, User experience.

17. Icon burger button - Timothy Miller

18. Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa, Murray Silverstein. “A Pattern Language.”: A Pattern Language 1977, p4.

19. Arthur Boetes: " These theories deal with combinations, specifically how many there are depending on what is combined and how much of what is combined there is, probability can be calculated by dividing the amount of possibilities of a certain configuration by the total amount of possible configurations.".

20. Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa, Murray Silverstein. “A Pattern Language.”: A Pattern Language 1977, p14.

Disorder 2 - body 2.1

21. H&D Summer_Academy_2018 Weaving_Anti-Patterns

22. metaphysical - "relating to the part of philosophy that is about understanding existence and knowledge"

23. Judith Butler, Undoing Gender: The End of Sexual Difference? p 472

The Opposition to a Pattern

24. Jim Coplien - Last edit January 10, 2011, See github about remodeling. Last checked and read for this text on January 16, 2020

25. Anti Pattern - Last edit November 21, 2012, See github about remodeling. Last checked and read for this text on January 16, 2020

When the Moth Meets the Bug

26. Thoughts constructed during; Marjanne van Helvert lecture talking about; "The parliament of things" at the Stedelijk museum April 2019

27. Clive Thompson, CODERS: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World, p 59. 

28. Binary - consisting of two - apposing - parts. Relating to the spirit of this text, such as; black and white, zero and one, male and female, punches or closed.

29. syntax - the structure of statements or elements in a computer language.

30. Data - collected information of users - information in an electronic form that can be stored and used by a computer.

Trans(-lation) 4 - Compilers 4.1

31. electromechanical computer - electro-mechanical computer (plural electro-mechanical computers) (computer hardware) an early type of computer that used storage wheels, rotary switches, and electromagnetic relays and was programmed by punched paper tape.

32. While she was working on a Mark II Computer at Harvard University in 1947, her associates discovered a moth that was stuck in a relay; the moth impeded the operation of the relay. While neither Hopper nor her crew mentioned the phrase "debugging" in their logs, the case was held as an instance of literal "debugging." For many years, the term bug had been in use in engineering. The remains of the moth can be found in the group's log book at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C. - Anacdotes

33. Joseph R. Hargitai, Anne B. Keating, The Wired Professor: A Guide to Incorporating the World Wide Web in College: History of Information Highways and Byways p 34

34. Arthur Boetes: " higher -level - A type of programming language that uses mainly English words and mathematical concepts which makes it easier to read/understand, adjust, move, reuse, conceptualise and is more general than a low level(binary or machine based - )language. Now a days, a vast majority of programmers write in high level programming languages. "

35. Arthur Boetes: " lower -level - A programming language that is closer to a binary or machine based language. Low level languages are often platform/hardware specific, and are hard to read as they contain hardly any words and use a lots of hexa decimal or binary codes.

Intertwined 4.2

36. Sadie Plant, Zeros and Ones: ADA, p 5.

37. Betty Alexandra, Ada, The Enchantress of Numbers, (Strawberry Press, Mill Valley, CA) p 696 (proposed by Anita Burato).

38. Sadie Plant, Zeros and Ones: Shuttle systems, p 67.

Unzip 5 - Normaal 5.1

39. apparatus - a set of equipment or tools or a machine that is used for a particular purpose

Letter 5.2

40. Normaal. Dutch word for normal Anecdote: "Doe normaal dan doe je al gek genoeg" - An adage in Dutch for "To behave normal, is behaving crazy enough".

41. Homo (homosexueel) In dutch often used as a synonym to address a romantic 'relationship' between men. - Thereby not taking other sexualities in consideration.

42. Niet normaal Dutch word for: abnormal, not normal.

43. The letter of the prime minister of The Netherlands, Mark Rutte on behalf of his political party VVD. (only available in dutch)

44. non-binary gender - Aberration of the binary gender-construction: Female or Male.

45. Nature magazine

When the bug starts breeding

An unstable introduction to patterns erected by systems in the realm of making

How public will this text be? This text will have its own webpage accessible for every user on the internet. Since it's distribution has been mainly by mailing lists and etherpads it is most likely that it will stay between these divs. But incase you'd like to refer to this text outside of these walls, you are welcome to do so. How does this publishing work? To keep a long story short, this webpage navigates through the text by passages with underneath every passage a embedded pad, in other words; underneath every passage there is an open source text editor where you can command for your text to be published. Tag your entries with '<' publish '>' In the navigation bar there is a button that turns the whole essay into an open document, where you can edit the 'published' text in private. However this a temporary option, the moment that the browser closes/refreshes the editing disappears.


Maintenance of patterns can stand in the way of interdisciplinary thinking and making. That does not mean that traditional patterns cannot be present in our daily lives, on the contrary, patterns are part of the fundamentals of human perception and being. The patterns that we come across are a merging of those we ourselves shape with patterns that are erected by others. How to identify these patterns? In this essay I would like to break down what patterns are, how they stabilise, and, if possible, to tackle some that are deeply knotted in our nets, like fishers [3] who will not use the same knots for each net. I don't believe that patterns can be a solution to every situation, or that there should be a solution to every situation. Like fishers can fabricate different kinds of nets for different uses, I don't believe they are bound to use a net.
In this research I question the patterns that cause some of the passive behaviours towards our perceptions. "The regular row of dots, once defined and matched, merely repeats and brings nothing new. Only breaks or interruptions, in other words, disorder -- might provide something new" [4]. When the Bug Starts Breeding gives a path to evoke and to poke, to pick on depictions and to picture new patterns.

Pattern 1

Sensible & Analytical Patterns 1.1

What are patterns? Patterns are a regularity in the universe; in human-made design, or in abstract ideas[5]. As such, the elements of a pattern seem to repeat in a predictable manner. There are patterns observable by the senses: these are patterns that speak to the eye, ear, skin and taste and are perceived to be recurring. That which is considered a pattern by the senses can be speculated upon physically, and can be an impression of repetition. Sensible patterns can be a small resemblance of something relating to what the senses have sensed before, like memory or a feeling. However that same pattern might not be recurring to others.

Patterns that do not speak to the senses can be identified through analysis. Analytical patterns are abstractions of a sensible pattern. These patterns that have originated from analysis can be proven by science, mathematics, economy and politics. Pattern analysis does have similarities to how patterns speak to senses. However, these patterns are only considered to be patterns when proven by analysis. The elements of the analytical patterns are taught rather than observed.

please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Fractal 1.2

    Patterns, Perception, and an Interference with Nature

    How is perception fuelled? It can occur that a sensible pattern is interacting with an analysed pattern. An example of analysing patterns interfering with sensible patterns are fractals. Fractals are born in the mathematical realm but 'existed' as a sensed pattern in nature. "Fractal geometry has effected a paradigm shift in our concept of nature.” [6] In other words, the senses project a depiction of a fractal[7] to 'real' nature. Some can be seen, for instance, in seashells and funguses.[8] Others less visible to the eye are cell structures and organs, like lungs. It is common to say that fractals appear in nature, though some of us don't know that this is a concept taken from science. Even less of us speak the language of science and cannot recall how the equations by Mandelbrot work. Nevertheless, we acknowledge natural fractals as part of nature and biology. We may never consider these depictions questionable, even though they take hold of our perceptions.

    "The dilemma of mathematicians is: what else is there to rely on, but formal systems? And the dilemma of Zen people is: what else is there to rely on, but words? Mumon states: "It cannot be expressed with words and it cannot be expressed without words."[9]

    Why do we put so much trust in the things that can be ‘proven’? The trust we have in analytics is not that different to the trust we have in what is sometimes described as irrational. When something is convincing enough, it can influence beliefs and change perceptions. To prove is to convince: science 'believes' that everything can be proven, and performs a language of persuasion. The system of this language acknowledges the fact that humans are unpredictable beings. Only by practicing and mastering that language can we understand the answers. Those who have mastered this language are few, nevertheless they don't necessarily grasp these patterns but still trust the predictions that are made by those who do understand. Does this trust stay between perceptions and depictions? We don't only perceive depictions but also embody the products that are produced by science."In the beginning of the nineteenth century, scholars were no longer willing to accept the irregularity of mountains. Geographers and geologists searched for regular structures behind their disorder, which they took to be only superficial". This "profound scepticism regarding the world of our direct perception" is something encountered not only in science but also philosophy, art and religion. Here, science produces a scepticism around direct perception or sensible patterns and follows the line of philosophy in questioning reality. But science separates the 'self' from truth when the exchange of pattern depiction takes place. Science, which claims to be first of all empirical, pronounces its scepticism towards other realities as well.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • The Pattern Ontology 1.3

    It is hard to write about patterns and perception without referring to ontology, a recurring subject in philosophy. It addresses the entity of things or objects in relation to our way of living. It poses overarching questions around the nature of being and the relation between nature and being. The pattern ontology, however, is not present without life. An algorithm can recognise a pattern, but is scripted to do so by a human being. This pattern ontology is about the 'stabilisation' of a pattern, and can rather be distinguished as a set of ontologies.[10]

    This pattern ontology[11] is my way of unpacking methods to recognise a pattern. The terms I list below can lead to establish a perception, for something becomes a pattern rather than simply being one. Before it is a pattern, it is something that is not yet recognised by the senses or through analysis. Here follows the ontologies of the pattern ontology.

    Content – content can be everything, for everything contains information and is constantly changing. Content itself is never stable.

    Compression - a reduction of volume.

    "Content comes with compression. Compression can be layers of cultural life and or information, or it can be manifested, in experience, in the density of jungle habitat, volcanic eruptions, tsunami; yet like water, which is not compressible."[12]

    Loop - a repeating engine, endless until interrupted by a different source. The loop can reveal that which has been recurring in the past.[13]

    Recursion - reconsidering an established position, feeding the input with the output, using parts of itself. Recursion is questioning the meaning of starting points in the past.

    A reductionism[14] of the ontologies of pattern. There is a field of lines, the lines are the content rushing and moving around constantly, in irregular motion, and tangling. This chaos makes it hard to define or to make sense of what the content is. To look closer at the content we separate a part, the separated part is still the content, only now moving in a smaller unit.

    By compressing and decompressing the unit, the content is being shaped. The compression is airtight, which means that the process will switch from a chaos to a solid. In the state of being solid, the compressed content can be ‘manipulated': this can be sliced into thin layers or break off into smaller units. Here, other information becomes visible. This is the part where the layers are categorised, the urge is to understand what their entity is. We loop through the content of the layers, scanning if there are resemblances, familiarities; a relatable paradigm. Here is where the two ways of observation take place; through senses or through analysis. The analysis likes to identify what the pieces possibly relate to, by going through the analytical tradition of observational methods. This can be by weighing, measuring and further experimenting until it is relating to something already in existence. The senses create relations with these pieces by giving an identification that relates directly or indirectly to oneself. With this identification, the senses might provoke a different approach to something existing and unfold new content.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Echo 1.4

    In the paragraphs above I tried to untangle the elements of a pattern through perceptions; the analytical and the sensible. What makes this subject so hard to grasp is that there are so many different patterns that orbit around different central points, so what makes the centre worth orbiting around? Is it proof of fact? Or does it become of worth when stabilised and ready to be activated? Activating patterns can be laid out by a set of instructions, or as a plan. When made according to plan, the result has the expected outcome. Good design is understood by everyone, therefore, the use of patterns is necessary to maintain an expected quality of understanding.

    A design pattern provides a reusable architectural outline. Design patterns are made to serve the senses, and are usually made through analysis. The traditional understanding of design patterns is that they're applicable solutions to recurring problems. My experience is that most patterns can be slightly changed in accordance with newly appearing problems. These problems appear by the fluctuation of content. The design pattern can dim this traffic of content by repeating in appearance over time. However, humans for whom design patterns are made can be unpredictable, and therefore a pattern needs an update.

    The word update is often used in digital design where design patterns and premises rule the aesthetic of the interface. [15] The criteria for how the interface is built is carefully informed by logistics of user behaviour, according to UI and UX[16] designers. But why such user behaviour is taking place is rarely questioned; if the burger button[17] is not following the design guidelines, users get confused and are distracted from the content of the website. Phones and tablets are the death of interactive media, because it tends to loop through the same interaction behaviours. These devices use navigation systems through gigantic buttons and icons that often only reveal words and videos. Where does the actual interaction take place? In the comments or likes?

    Christopher Alexander has a different take when it comes to design patterns. These patterns construct a system that does not need to be updated, but that contains enough space for the participants to anticipate, by interacting with the ‘Pattern Language’ manual.

    The elements of this language are entities called patterns. Each pattern describes a problem which occurs over and over again in our environment, and then describes the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way that you can use this solution a million times over, without ever doing it the same way twice.[18]

    What is important to note here is that the pattern language is not a loop applied to generate an expected UX outcome, but rather that it methodologically uses the unexpected outcome to its advantage. The pattern language is assembled through an analytical approach, but it does not overpower the senses.

    An analytical approach in Alexander's Pattern Language relies on combinatorics and probability theory[19]. I will explain; the core solution is dependent on multiple environments and interpretations of the patterns. These environments can be almost anything and so we have many elements that can be combined. In architecture, every optional environment grows exponentially with respect to the amount of 'originated' environments. Thereby the chances are small, if not zero, that the same outcome is selected twice.

    …We have called it “A Pattern Language”, with the emphasis on the word "A," and… we imagine this pattern language might be related to the countless thousands of other languages we hope that people will make for themselves, in the future. The Timeless Way of Building says that every society which is alive and whole, will have its own unique and distinct pattern language; and further, that every individual in such a society will have a unique language, shared in part, but which as a totality is unique to the mind of the person who has it. In this sense, in a healthy society there will be as many pattern languages as there are people—even though these languages are shared and similar.[20]

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Disorder 2

    Body 2.1

    An experiment I conducted at a workshop[21] can perhaps resonate with Alexander’s pattern language. The participants were assembling patterns in an order within the exact same framework and yet all came up with different compositions. Afterwards, we calculated together what the chances were that two of the participants could have the same combination, and this was less than one percent.

    My body is mine - what influence does the body have on the metaphysical [22] pattern? As a moth is attracted to light, we ourselves are attracted to rationality and predictions, but tend to forget that our perception is influenced by bodily interpretations and desires. Cells, hormones, genetics and body receptors conduct their own flows of information. Like the experiment mentioned above, we loop through faculties and rationalise why we did not fabricate the exact same combinations. Even though the result was laying in front of us, there is the tendency to desire proof. Why certain orders were chosen in the creation of these patterns [despite our similarities to one another] cannot be solved through calculations alone. I see the construction of the assignment as if feeding a compression with loads of content that is forced to decompress. The entity of the compression lives through the scattered variations of the new compressions. These compressions are not totally separate: they share similarities, but are not copies of one another.

    The participants were able to generate a composition without the intention of a certain order, which means that without a plan they were still able to create. Intuitive creation does not always have to be rationalised, explained or understood. The mystification of unintentional creation can enhance new connections and questions, leading to ideas and other expressions of the body.

    Judith Butler writes:

    Every time I try to write about the body, the writing ends up being about language. This is not because I think that the body is reducible to language; it is not. Language emerges from the body, constituting an emission of sorts. The body is that upon which language falters, and the body carries its own signs, its own signifiers, in ways that remain largely unconscious.

    As a person you may think; "My body is mine,” or "It is my body, I can do whatever I want.” Did it ever occur to you that our bodies have that same influence over the I? For the body gives as many signs of awareness as the mind does. Our bodies play a grand part in our experiences and perceptions, but what is generated from the body is often not valued as proof, or evidence. When it comes to a work of art, we can all agree that it did not just appear, but that a creation took place. Performance art is an expression or choreography that exists in the moment of performing. The bodies that carry the memories - the audience and the performer - are essential to the performative work.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • The Opposition to a Pattern 2.2

    The opposition to a pattern is in favour of a proposition for unexpected discoveries or the interruption of what is seen as harmony. This is what I would like to call the anti-pattern. The anti-patterns are the breaks, the interruptions or, in other words, a disorder. Like a pattern, anti-patterns are present in our routines but are not as desirable because they can disturb the creation of regularities. Here, what the oppositions to patterns imply is the opposite of regularities in human-made design, or in abstract ideas. An anti-pattern appears through the frame or construction of a pattern.

    On the website Wiki.c2 there is a definition of an anti-pattern. This definition, however, is merely summarising the position of anti-patterns in design and software engineering. "An AntiPattern is a pattern that tells how to go from a problem to a bad solution."

    … "According to Jim Coplien[24]: "An anti-pattern is something that looks like a good idea, but which backfires badly when applied. It's not fun documenting the things that most people agree won't work, but it is necessary because many people may not recognise the AntiPattern."[25]

    This definition raises the same question as before, "…who or what is it patterning for?” Speaking from the perspective of design with this definition, the anti-pattern is an important factor in designing patterns. It teaches what the regularity in designs are, and can open possibilities to new designs and approaches. As for the documentation of Jim Copliens anti-patterns, that would work in the opposite direction. Maintaining the stigmas of these documented anti-patterns and using them as a manual to prevent design mistakes causes the effect of looping through the same design choices from a) to b) and over again. This does not allow the creation of deviation or innovation in design. What often happens is that deviant design is categorised as arts.

    This same conflict seems to appear in arts and other disciplines. When a work is not crafted by certain tradition, it is swept under the carpet of ‘undefined,’or in some way archived to be exhibited at a moment of relevance. The relatable paradigm of the arts, sciences, philosophy and design is that the consistency of each is questioned. It is as if they are watching each other from a high tower, waiting for someone to cross a border, while desiring to be that someone.

    To entangle is to perform; it cannot be a stack of blocks. Spaghetti must be cooked in order mingle.
    "It takes a pattern to anti-pattern."

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • When the Moth Meets the Bug 3

    The moth, the bug, when do they appear? Is it because the light of the screen was on all night? Perhaps it was some lemonade spilled on the desk. How did it find its way into the closet, or into the lines of our code?

    The moth’s larvae crave natural fibres and, if tucked away in their favourite habitat, eat holes in the fabric. The favourite dish of the larvae is wool, since it contains keratin, but most fabric owners are not so happy with their knits being eaten. The holes are so small that they seem invisible in the beginning, but what happens if there is a tiny hole in a knit? Knits are made of interlacing loops, so the knit gets fragile when the structure is damaged. The tiny hole expands like a stain; every pull pushes the edge while the larvae feast. Washing by hand is an option to remove the larvae, but repairing the hole is inescapable. Holes can be filled by darning or weaving. Both are slow processes completed by hand and can be captivating when the technique is carried out. There is always the option of throwing the fabric away, but why not maintain what you have kept for so long?
    Getting into a flow of micro-processes, casting on can be the start of fabrication, though it is possible to intervene in an already existing creation. The process of repair will build a relation[26] with that which has been repaired and new thoughts and ends can arise.

    Looking from the moth’s perspective, textiles like wool and silk are the perfect circumstances to continue a production cycle. By removing the eggs we interrupt the life-cycle of the moth, while maintaining an artificial habitat for it.

    “Constant Frustration and Bursts of Joy”[27] is the title of the third chapter in the book Coders by Clive Thompson. Here, Thompson emphasises that finding bugs is an inescapable aspect of programming. Big tech companies and IT departments are filled with programmers that are hunting for these bugs. How do they appear? Just like an anti-pattern, a bug is an interruption of a working system. There are unattended bugs that are bred from the mistakes of coders. Could those mistakes be an unconscious sabotage of a linear structure? This 'sabotage' acknowledges that the body is not entirely compatible with the binary[28] nature of the coding language. But there are also bugs that are not blinded by the pattern of the syntax[29], and are bred with intention. In this case there is someone that interferes with code without explicit permission. With regards to permission, I could include a whole chapter dedicated to what or who should one ask for permission, but in this essay I will not elaborate too much on that.
    Accessing a system using a bug is called hacking. ‘Hack,’ which in its formal definition implies a cut or a chop, resonates with the enactment of interruption that may cause the entanglement I am looking for. So, why would someone want to hack? The motivation for entering a system can vary greatly. The motive that is presented to us by the media, for example, is that hacking is a criminal act. This can be compared with entering private property without permission, however the internet was - in its original state - not a private space. That is until it became a platform where data[30] takes the commodity form. Hacking is an approach to doing and seeing things differently. That can be through an improvement of one thing or a dismantling of another.

    Syntax highlights blinding one’s eye. The lines, the code, are compressed modules of patterns, making it hard for life not to enter.

    There are scattered sources explaining where the terms ‘bug’ and ‘debugging' derived from, though it is worth mentioning that in 1947 a moth interfered with an early electromechanical computer[31] and caused a malfunction. This intervention was logged and published with the heading: "First actual case of bug being found” - with the monstrous moth attached to it.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Trans (-lation) 4

    Compilers 4.1

    The researcher writing this log was Grace Hopper, who worked on the project Mark II - a computer at Harvard University - where the moth was found[32]. Educated in mathematics and physics, Hopper was familiar with symbolic languages and wanted to make them more accessible to larger audiences. She proposed the creation of a new programming language that would use English words instead of zeros and ones, which was received sceptically by the board who uttered that, “she couldn't do this because computers didn't understand English.”[33] Nonetheless, she worked with a team to create a compiler. Compilers are a translation tool working to shift from a ‘higher-level’[34] programming language to a ‘lower-level’ language. In Hopper's time, all programming languages were ‘lower-level’[35] languages, whereas contemporarily our programming languages are specified based on the field in which they are used.

    Hopper saw the potential of engaging other people into programming, other people that did not have scientific backgrounds, and thereby opening up the possibilities that other voices, other languages, have in products that derived from science. The computer would not maintain a compressed production, hidden in the realm of science where its functionality might loop through the same visions and goals, but rather would be opened up by the invitation of interaction and discussion with others. This would enable it to become not only a tool for scientists but also for philosophers, engineers, artists, makers, and ultimately for anyone that takes interest in learning programming languages.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Intertwined 4.2

    In the early days of programming, lower-level languages [binary code] were manually punched in cards. Programming through punchcards can be seen as an earlier form of compiling. Weaving looms were one of the first mechanisms adopting this technique, and one among these is the Jacquard Loom. This machine became an inspiration for the Analytical Engine that Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage were working on in the 1840s. Lovelace is considered as the pioneer of programming language and was only credited a decade later, when the language ADA was named after her. Lovelace was one of the few women of her time with access to learn symbolic languages. When she was young she was tutored in mathematics by her mother Annabella.[36] Besides being a mathematician, Lovelace was also a translator and an admirer of poetry. She worked on the notes of the Analytical Engine and notated the potential of adding functions, storing combinations and executing algorithms, which was different from the calculating system.

    "We say most aptly that the Analytical Engine weaves algebraical patterns just as the Jacquard Loom weaves flowers and leaves.”
    [37] Through the notes of Babbage she proposed that it was possible to manipulate the binary instead of merely adding or summing. Unfortunately, the Analytical Engine was never realised, however the ideas behind it run through the veins of our devices today.

    Just as Lovelace never received acknowledgement for her contribution during her lifetime, many other people that have propelled technology are not considered part of the tradition of science.
    "The spindle and the wheel used in spinning yarn are the basis of all later axles, wheels, and rotations; the interlaced threads of the loom compose the most abstract process in fabrication. Textiles themselves are very literally the software linings of all technology." [38]
    It is unfortunate that these roads have never been mapped. Would that have changed our perception towards the devices that we carry so closely on our bodies? These early technologies might not always have been invented in laboratories or by academics, but also in less credited circles of manual labour, like households or factories.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Unzip 5

    Normaal 5.1

    Through my research I try to question which tools construct our patterns of reality. As previously mentioned, "patterns are one of the fundamentals of human perception,” and that includes perceptions of the past, present, and the desire to foresee the future. Active patterns or designed patterns tell us that we can imagine patterns, communicate through patterns, or build constructions with patterns. Patterns are used as an apparatus[39] by perception. The apparatus can be rebuild and, just like perception, it can transform, which makes it difficult to separate the two. What seems to be different is that patterns can bring stability or a sense of foundation, lying in stark contrast to the fluidity of perception. Stability can provide a foundation: a solid form. In my definition of the pattern ontology I name this state a form of compression. From that foundation a ‘normative' ideology tends to be built. But what exactly is normative? ‘Normative’ should not be confused with the word ‘normativity’ - they are different. ‘Normative’ relates to an assumed norm - part of the word ‘normative.’ ‘Normativity' is a phenomenon that will be explained following the below paragraph.

    ‘Normal’ is actually different for everyone: as previously mentioned, perceptions in individuals are different. However ‘normatively’ is often assumed to be the norm for everyone. What the norm is remains a perception, but what we have discovered in an early passage of this text is that perception is fluid; it is not a brick, even when it seems to be a very convincing brick, perfectly crafted by someone. That brick is not absolute and can still be broken, built into something else. The trust we put into what manifests from patterns can be contradictory to what is meaningful or truthful to oneself.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • Letter 5.2

    In January 2017, the prime minister of The Netherlands wrote a letter on behalf of his political party (VVD), to citizens of the country. In this letter, he tried to elaborate on what he thinks is happening to national norms. Unfortunately there is no translation to English, so this is a compression and translation of the text by me. The letter begins with the statement: "Sometimes it seems as if nobody is normal anymore." It remains slightly ambiguous as to what this normaal[40] means, however he does state what he does not consider as ‘normal’. This includes violent acts, abuse of money provided by the state, female assault, gay[homo][41] harassment and excusing 'normal' Dutch people to be racist. Niet normaal[42]. It then hints at what the causes might be, and states that he understands the feeling some citizens have about deporting those that are ‘not normal’. It follows that the solution is not to "treat everything or anyone in the same way,” but that the solution lies in the matter of mentality. The best thing we could do, he thinks, is “... to continue to make crystal clear what is normal and what is not normal in this country." He shares what he considers to be normal; no act of violence, working for money, to get the best out of your life, helping each other and having a proactive attitude towards finding solutions. He ends with
    “...we can sustain everything we have achieved together.”[43]

    The arguments in this letter are divided into dualities: there is no grey area between the ‘normal’ and the ‘abnormal’. The opposition of norms stated by an authority are not necessarily the norms for everyone, and it is here that the word ‘normativity’ comes into play. The letter illustrates the construction of a normativity, rather than questioning normativity itself. What if I do abuse money from the state to make sculptures, help refugees with integrating, transition into a non-binary gender[44] and call my Dutch neighbour a racist? According to the conditions this will not fit into the criteria of the norm, which can lead to questions such as: Am I not considered Dutch or normal by the prime minister? What about those that spend their time in the fields of the arts, those who research in the realm of science, work as volunteers, take care of domestic labour or create communities? Do they not fit the norm of this society either? The foundations of normativity are compressed patterns that come with a weight. This weight can lead to oppression. Oppression is not invisible, and has a physical and mental influence on perception.

    Why is the normativity described by the prime minister important to this essay? Because it fuels the question: why is art not acknowledged by society? Counter-systems are not part of the norm. By becoming active in understanding the tools of perception, one can build counter-systems and anti-patterns. This can be liberating and open all kinds of doors for creation, questions, translations and conversations. Systems and counter-systems are what I tend to be mesmerised by, which can also be described as a will for building. That is hard to consider as a form of art, because it is often invisible, without an identification. Nor can it be installed on a pedestal. Being aware of the above begs me to question: what will happen if I want to establish myself as an artist? Am I not making art, if I would only build systems without a visual outcome? Should art not be a door to different realities, an interruption of systems, a remaking, a rethinking, a realisation of urges, a translation of thoughts and other forms of languages, without being necessarily rationalised by the traditions of art?

    The white cubes of the fine art galleries and contemporary museums have been white for over fifty years. Those white walls have been the subject of many critiques among artists, but continue to be considered as the norm. There are artists that cannot even imagine a work outside of these walls. It is a reality and a beautiful metaphor for isolation. Art is similar to design, science and philosophy, which all create tools for society, either as perceptions or objects. But just like society, design and science, art needs new perceptions as well.

    please take into account; to not open many pads at the same time. Thank you :)
  • Incase your browser does not like cookies: this is a link to the etherpad website
  • sum 6

    Zip 6.1

    In the preface, I proposed that my urge is to entangle, and in this attempt I followed different variations of threads that lead to knots of perception, language, patterns, interruptions, bodies, normativity, anti-patterns and bugs. The itch that drove me to dig into such research is one that wants to direct some of the norms and technologies that I am entangled with. Entanglements are present from the moment that you're a seed, and even before the existence of an I or a you, it is inescapable.

    My intentions for this text are to open up this research through the form of publication. This will appear in different forms. One is through an open document online that invites conversations, participation and feedbacks from unpredictable sources. The webpage will host small editorial functions that provide possibilities for customised reading and adjustments. To complete the circuit, every now and then a physical publication will be made to press those inputs onto paper. Those booklets may in time grow into a catalogue of thoughts. Our contribution to these thoughts might not appear in nature[45], but perhaps will loosen some of the readers knots, making room for other thoughts to appear. Rethinking systems creates possibility to decompress, to loop through content, and to recurse into new threads of entanglement.