Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts Sake 157
ungulation writes "A joint project of SFMOMA, The Goethe-Institut, ZKM Karlsruhe, and the Walker Art Center, a group called CrossFade broadcast the entire linux kernel 2.4.18. From the CrossFade website: "In Free Radio Linux, the entire source code of the Linux kernel will be webcast over the Internet. A speech synthesizer will convert into talk radio the 4,141,432 lines of code, which will take about 600 days to read." According to the Free Radio Linux website the stream is only available in ogg-vorbis format."
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:4, Insightful)
As geeky as we geeks are, artists are at a whole other level of weird. Accept it and stick to what you're good at, huh?
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:3, Insightful)
To some people it's entertaining. Last time I checked entertainment was a pratical use. Look at games, movies, music. All for entertainment. They have a hell of a lot more use than the Linux Kernel being read off line by line.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
The (IMHO) more bollocksy modern art does not afford enjoyment in itself, it is more the idea behind the work of art that interests people and offers them enjoyment. Somewhat like that artist that sold cans of his own faeces. Interesting idea, sure, and it makes for a great news item on TV, but I wouldn't care much to own one of those cans myself. Oh well, for some people this is good enough to be called art and who am I to gainsay them? As long as they don't get a g..damn state subsidy for it...
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, you could certainly argue that in today's "postmodern" (whatever the hell that means) world, we must expand our definitions of art and performances, and take an "artist's" word for it when they claim that the landscape around them is their work of art, or that speech-synthesizing kernels is a "performance" of some sort, but I just don't buy it in this case.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:3, Informative)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:3, Insightful)
Source code is art?
Source code is speech?
Source code is free speech?
I'm not going to listen to this for more than a minute, and I'm sure many other will do the same. The fact that no one will consume the entire piece doesn't make it any less meaningful. The point of the piece is that someone actually went out to do it.
If it helps, think of it in terms of DeCSS.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
You totally missed the point. The point is not the words "free", "public domain", or "free software". The point is the word speech. There's a big legal fight going on right now over whether software is speech at all, let alone "free" or "public domain" speech.
Your quote should say "So they're trying to point out that source code is speech." The rest of the message following that is just pointing out stuff unrelated to artwork.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
Now, I'm not saying that source code is or isn't speech, but simply reading a bunch of it off on some ridiculous webcast isn't proof one way or another, and anyone who uses a webcast like this in any court of law as evidence one way or another is going to get laughed out of the room.
I'm also not saying that the webcast is a completely stupid idea. Like I said in another post, there's a certain geeky flair to it that makes the whole thing sort of fun. But if the people putting it together think they're going to prove that code is speech by doing so, they're delusional.
The most difficult part of performance art... (Score:1)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
You may not know it, but ballet is actually an ancient european martial art. If you doubt this, go fight a dancer, you'll see.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
What practical use does a nutcracker suite have?! (Score:2)
What practical use does a nutcracker suite have?! Well, duh, cracking nuts maybe?
(Sorry, I couldn't resist! I am a great fan of Tchaikovsky's music, by the way. I'm listening to the Waltz from Swan Lake right now.)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:1)
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:1, Funny)
Isn't this the same crowd that thinks sig lines are too long, flames newbies for cross-posting, etc. because "bandwidth is a precious resource?"
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:3, Insightful)
A waste of bandwidth? A waste of resources?
Maybe, but dont flame the guys for having fun :-)
No (Score:2)
You're not.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:1, Flamebait)
I can genuinely think of not one reason why the hell you would do this.
And its even funnier that its 'Ogg Vorbis only' - well thank god, that should keep out the non Linux extremists and purists from evesdropping on inferior MP3 to this highly secretive broadbast
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
What it truly is - is a waste of bandwidth.
More complicated than that I think... (Score:2, Interesting)
Many of the artists I have worked with start out with an idea that they think is "cool", or is "aesthetically pleasing", or reflects some sort of social phenomenon, etc. The beginning of the piece is usually very shallow. After longer thought, more and more philosphical justification is caked onto the original idea until it finally carries some weight in the mind of the artist(s).
The problem is that most of us "laypeople" see the end result and only understand the same shallow meaning (or lack thereof) that originally instigated the piece, and quickly write it off as stupid. In my opinion, however, it is the artists RESPONSIBILITY to make the piece compelling enough to be necessarily thought provoking. Like others have mentioned, most people are going to look at (listen to) the broadcast and just go: "duh, that is really lame." There may be a tiny circle of pretentious art critics that will bother to crack the surface of the piece and get to what the artists intended, but then the effect of the piece is totally lost.
But that brings me to another (and somewhat annoying) element of pieces like this. If I am going to spend my time thinking about the meaning behind the piece I want to KNOW that the artists did the same. And that there is some conclusion to be drawn (or at least an interesting journey in the exploration of the meaning). The idea that an artist shouldn't "explain" their work is ludicrous. I have seen so many times that this is an excuse to protect the weak meaning and feeble thought behind the work. (I am not implying that all art/artists are so, as there are many who spend great effort to express well thought out and profound ideas in interesting ways. But the opposite is also true.)
So I guess my statement is this: I would like to see a summary of the ideas that the artists are addressing in this broadcast...at the very least. I don't think it is a waste of time unless there is no meaning...but at the same time, even if there is meaning, I presume it will be lost on the majority of viewers because of poor execution (lack of necessary connections to the meaning) and will therefore still be a waste of time.
But we'll see...
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
Yes, it's waste of time. Unlike participating in Slashdot discussions about topics, in which you have no interest at all, and posting questions like the above. Now, that's what I call a productive use of your time. Now, will you excuse me, while I'll be stupidly wasting my time playing Go. Fortunately, I haven't wasted all of my time today, since I answered to your comment.
OK, I've said it. Good bye, my precious karma.
Have a nice Xmas.
Re: Speech Synthesizing the Linux Kernel for Arts (Score:2)
I don't believe I wasted the time even reading the article.
I might as well post about my server monitoring software that talks too. Some days he just doesn't shut up, but at least he's more entertaining, where he'll randomly insult people.. Who would listen to spoken code all day? Maybe if they just did the funny comments, but not all the code..
I can think of better things to do for two years with my computers..
Will they broadcast the openoffice code..... (Score:1)
In related news... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:In related news... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:In related news... (Score:2)
Well, I guess it's possible somebody will stumble accoss it if you speend 600 days webcasting it.
-
Damn... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Damn... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Damn... (Score:1)
Say Goodbye to WMA (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft understands and now finally the open source community does too! It's not about having a better codec (ogg vs. wma), but making the hot content that people want avaliable. Well, I think it's obvious to everyone that with ogg's virtual monopoly on voice synth spoken linux kernel broadcasts, wma's days are numbered.
Re:Say Goodbye to WMA (Score:2)
Monty
And now to get it back in source form (Score:1)
Re:And now to get it back in source form (Score:1)
that thing known as God already did
Re:And now to get it back in source form (Score:2, Interesting)
What, to get around US export restrictions, like PGP used to?
(they would print out their source code, export it in paper form and OCR it in switzerland to make the PGPi codebase. at least so I've heard.)
Seriously! (Score:5, Interesting)
But something like this.... Does this make people think "Wow, Linux is Free Speech and Good" or "Wow, Linux users are a bunch of loonies with a religious bent and more concerned with ideals rather than developing a serious OS my business can depend on."
I don't see how this is useful or good in any way. 600 days? I just say, "Why?"
Re:Seriously! (Score:2, Insightful)
The sad part is, I know at least 20 people that would keep it on for ambiance in their home.
Re:Seriously! (Score:1)
Re:Seriously! (Score:2)
Re:Seriously! (Score:3, Insightful)
Life Walk 5000 anyone? (Score:2)
For those who are wondering about the title of my post, this is from the movie Nothing lasts forever [imdb.com] by Tom Schiller. Life Walk 5000 was an installation of an artist walking on a threadmill and counting to a million (obviously mocking modern art)
Wasn't this being done already? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Wasn't this being done already? (Score:1)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/02/03/054
Re:Wasn't this being done already? (Score:1)
It sure as hell isn't [slashdot.org] - is anybody else having a deja vu [slashdot.org] currently?
np: Amon Tobin - Cosmo Retro Intro Outro (Out From Out Where)
I wonder... (Score:2)
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
If you play it backwards.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:If you play it backwards.... (Score:3, Funny)
I just got this image of a really thin and really dry guy with long hair sitting perfectly still and chanting:
I have four words for ya:
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
C'mon! Wooooooo! C-c-c-c'mon, c'mon! Wooooooo! C'mon!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Wooo! C'mon! Get up! Get up! C'mooon! Woo! Augh!
C'mon! Give it up for me! Woo! Woooo! C'mooon!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
Weenies, weenies, weenies, weenies!
I...hate...this...company, YEEEEEEEEEEAH!
If anyone doesn't get it, click here [msboycott.com] and Microsoft's very own Steve Ballmer will explain it to you.
-
Re: (Score:1)
what kernel? (Score:1, Funny)
slash kernel slash sched dot c slash asterisk line break asterisk (...) 1998-12-28 Implemented better SMP scheduling by Ingo Molnar
Dang! It's the vanilla kernel where are user mode Linux and Alan's cool toys ?
switches station
Silmarillion. Spoken. Again.
switches station again
eight dot three four six minus a dash greather than c zero wb zero yn dot eat...
Yay, they've got Reiser in this one, but they're still reciteing the console driver, it'll be 3 days before we get to the filesystem
switches stations frantically
hash include less-than linux slash config dot h NO NO GET OUT OF HERE WHAT ARE YOU DOING ?
Hello, I am Richard M. Stallman and you are being deceived, for it takes much more than a kernel to get a computer going. Here are 3 billion lines of GNU code that this radio hasn't read aloud yet. [DOOR SLAMS] Tee hee, and how do you think you get those tiny little icons on the screen ? Here's the XFree86 source to be read.
turns off radio, goes to slashdot, picks cowboyneal option on poll
Order Now! (Score:2, Funny)
Linux 2.4.18 on CD:
$31,000 (s&h 780$)
Linux 2.4.18 on Cassette:
$28,458 (s&h 780$)
NO COD'S!
Visa and Mastercard Accepted!
Interesting.. I Had No Idea.... (Score:2)
Apparently, the Linux source code consists entirely of 300 megs worth of "La-losinge base line double quote"..
Is this really a good idea? (Score:2, Insightful)
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Oh dear...
Tom Hanks: Uh... Slash Asterisk Hash Include Opening Tag Windows Ninety-Five Closing Tag Asterisk Slash... Hey, why has that fat guy just fainted?
Gates: Ballmer? He's expendable and so are you, to me at least. Forget that last line right now, minion!
Re:In other news... (Score:2)
Radio (Score:1)
Re:Radio (Score:2)
Heh, yeah, it's called "Write to disk"
I wonder... (Score:1, Funny)
Also, how long will it then take before "concerned parents" get the project off the air? >_
Free Speech? (Score:1)
Talking hosts (Score:2)
Reasons to do it!! (Score:3, Funny)
Oh yeah! (Score:1)
Schnozzzzzzzzz...
Something is wrong with the stream. (Score:2)
Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Awesome! (Score:2)
If you prefer using open standards [ietf.org] route, then you might want to look at transfering the Linux src via the Carrier Pigeon Internet Protocol (CPIP) [com.com] instead.
(Of ocurse you'd have to do something like ftp over cpip).
Been done... (Score:4, Interesting)
"This function is void, it takes two args/The first is sec a pointer to 2048 unsigned bytes/That are the encrypted disk sector and will be decrypted"
How much time effort and funds are invested here? (Score:2)
And as for all the posts here going on about this being performance arts, go get a law degree; you seem to be good at arguing for arguments' sake; no matter if you don't specifically agree with what you yourself are saying.
This is almost the kind of wanton displays of plenty and wealth that one sees from developed nations that makes one think of hungry Somali children or AIDS-stricken Thai youth.
Pardon the melodrama; it is not intended.
Re:How much time effort and funds are invested her (Score:1)
Free speech, you dumbasses (Score:2)
I venture to guess that the real purpose behind this is to speak the entire Linux source tree so there's no question that it is protected speech. Thus, any efforts to supress it via mechanisms like the DMCA or CBDTPA (or whatever the fuck it's called) would be much more clearly in violation of the first amendment.
Of course, there's no guarantee that this approach would be worth a damn, since patents/copyright already supersede free speech rights in lots of cases, but it's not completely pointless.
Re:Free speech, you dumbasses (Score:2)
Pointless (Score:2, Insightful)
Well worth knowing, I'm sure. But they spent 1,757 days to do it. Nearly half a decade. Surely it didn't require FIVE years to "learn" what was obvious within a month of the project starting!
Like RC5-64, this "Speech Synthesized Kernel WebCast" is another such example of "there's absolutely no doubt it can be done, it'll take a whole bunch of resources to pull off, it won't be finished for two years, it'll be completely irrelevant when it does finish, and we won't learn anything in the process."
This isn't art, it's just pointless. Calling it "art" is a patently weak justification.
Hey, don't get me wrong -- I couldn't care less whether they do it or not, it just makes me wonder how nuts these people are.
Seriously, the only way this thing's going to achieve any more than a cursory listen by a small number of bored Slashdot readers is if the synthesized voice is set to "breathy, seductive woman"...
Re:Pointless (Score:1)
Re:Pointless (Score:2)
Hmm... could be raunchy (Score:2)
28
[jpj@soul linux-2.4]$ find . -type f -exec grep -Hi shit {} \; | wc -l
75
Re:Hmm... could be raunchy (Score:4, Funny)
Real Men (Score:2)
Re:Real Men (Score:2)
For more information: (Score:4, Interesting)
This is only the beginning.... (Score:2)
use textto speech conversion.
One voice recites the linux kernel source,
Another reads "the cathedral & the bazaar", the original halloween documents, other open source core docs, etc.
Another recites a local User Group maillist, by using
Another recites the kernel maillist.
Find some way to change voices, either to other voices or add/remove effects on the lists at "To" headers.
The point was to represent the community of open-source. However, I had no intention of broadcasting the result. Thanks to these guys I know it'll take two years to finish voice/channel 1: so it's unlikely it'd be there for two years, but that's not the point.
I haven't worked on this for a bit, but should get back to reading the Linux sound docs and developing specs to do text-to-speech conversion on four text streams simultaneously and output on four mono audio channels. Then I want to try doing this kind of thing on an OS X platform.
Only Thing More Brain-Dead (Score:1)
random thoughts... (Score:2)
well, it certainly challenges what we think of as art and what we think machines are capable of. the fact is that hundreds of people wrote the code to make this "computer created" art so is it truly even "computer created?"
it's also a great way to test ogg streaming clients. for 600 days we'll have a url we can always connect to and test.
It just isnt' a good idea. Not without music! (Score:1)
I'm just picturing it. The broadcast is picked up by some intelligence people who are not in the know and they start recording it. The staff will start working on "breaking the code" and there will be a general alert about how the radio station could be broadcasting top secret information to "the enemy".
I'm thinking something along the lines of Orsen Wells in terms of reaction.
Of course, there is the flip side: You might end up putting people in a coma from the sheer boredom of listening to source code being recited for hours on end. By a synthetic voice, no less!
I'm all for Linux. I use it on all of my system s at home. But having the source code read aloud on the radio just seems like a major waste of time, resources, and opens up a whole can of worms...
Some examples:
It's just not something that would be good to do. (With the exception of the lively wind and string section, that is.)
Re:It just isnt' a good idea. Not without music! (Score:1)
Correction on the MS code recitation.
More likely than not, you will be required to upgrade your radios if you listen to the MS radio broadcast. Definitely a bad thing.
To make people listen (Score:1)
reading and sing the linux kernel to the tune of
every number 1 hit from 1980 to 1999.
Now that might be interesting.
-J
MS takes the Challenge (Score:1)
When asked about why they will disclose the sources in this way, the official response was: "Any moron at all will bother hearing that, anyway"
Broadcast into space.... (Score:2, Funny)
What better way to show any potential aliens that there is intelligent life on earth.
Just don't broadcast the Windows source into space; aliens might launch a full assault immediately.
Spamradio (Score:2, Interesting)
Quoting from their site:
"Spamradio is serving up delicious helpings of spam each hour of every day to all who are hungry.
Using a complex arrangement of pipes and funnels we turn the junk mail that we receive into a streaming audio broadcast that can be enjoyed from anywhere on the Internet."
I sometimes listen to it during coding sprees late at night; eerie but worth a listen.
Don't they have anything better to do? (Score:1)
The REALLY interesting question (Score:3, Interesting)
Aw shucks (Score:1)
Should of done this with the DeCSS . . . (Score:1)
Don't Forget About National Security (Score:1)
Book (Score:2)
Why not Plato (Score:2)
Re:Why not Plato (Score:2)
Re:Why not Plato (Score:2)
Yoko Ono (Score:2)
The only thing this piece needs is Yoko Ono rhythmicly chanting "number nine, number nine, number nine..." in the background. IIRC, it was John Lennon who did it originally, but he's gone so Yoko seems like the ideal stand-in for this. Bonus points if Yoko will do it live for a full 24 hours at least one day; as opposed to simply sampling an endless loop of chants.