Notes for visi.on.air talk, 26-10-2020
Maxlab Antwerp

Peter@constantvzw.org

*Channel 0

# Public enemy cover: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NzZNiuG65I

Why are we showing a desktop setup
Instead of using the non open source NDI Network Device Interface  we chose in this streaming setup to connect to the channel by filming my screen. On the one hand, this obviously results in loss of readability of texts and color callibration, but on the other hand this opens new spaces to play around with. 

*CHANNEL
What is a channel? 

- CONCEPT: a certain vision, idea, or concept to frame the programs
- CONTEXT: location on/ a platform / device that hosts a series of broadcasts .or programs, 
always the same place? is that even necessary in the age of the search engine?
- a technical device, between capturing the image/ sound signals and displaying them to be heard seen elsewhere
- it lives in context: broadcasting / viewing on the internet is not the same as broadcasting on a television set: the surroundings are different. 
law, society

(what else?)
these factors determine what is seen/ and the conditions in which this is done
it is not only what is broadcasted, but also how, throgh which means; 

a channel is a tv term that is applied to the net, you can wonder if the analogy survives
the internet is a bunch of datastreams of different types of protocols that send info from on en dto the other, some protocols permit realtime response, others not.

I am writing in paralel on an etherpad, which allows for collective writing of pages. 
you could say that this is an interactive streaming service for text. Maybe we could say that the each page is a channel.

This is a typical many to many system, but a youtube live channel is not, it is old fashioned one to many of course with the big difference that there are thousands of people offering content through channels.

*CONSENT
I want to focus on one aspect of showing hosted or live video on a web platform and that is the consent you give to the terms that are specified by the platform. 

a platform is not legally obliged to post a Terms of use document but most do. 
this is a way to regulate what people do on the platform, and to arrange rights and expectations that are binding at the moment you agree to them

# http://giss.tv/

An early internet example of this is the Terms of use of Giss.tv

Giss.tv is a good example of an early artistic internet independent platform; 
It is a (free software) Icecast streaming server that is open for everyone to use. 
Giss is made by artists who, long before youtube had the desire to stream and use the internet what it is good for. 
To communicate with people who are elsewhere.
The terms of use are quite simple and explicit. 

* The must be copyleft or under non-commercial copyright (a creative commons license)
* If it is not, then you must have authorization to stream by the author/creator.
* No advertising or commercial music
* No  racism,  nationalism, xenophobia, sexism, homophobia, ... 
* No religious programs or missionarism... 
* We will not accept neither any kind of propaganda : religious, political or sectarian.

#open http://giss.tv/dmmdb/index.php?channel=hackmeeting

This is clearly stating the conditions that are given and this selects of course the projects that feel they belong here, and that use the service.
Channels are made by groups such as for example Calafou, an eco-industrial postcapitalist community near Barcelona. 

# open http://giss.tv/dmmdb/chanlist.php
There are many radiostations, especially in the spanish speaking countries in Latino America who use this for there internet radios.

*CONDITIONS
# open https://tosdr.org/

Now did someone ever try reading the terms of youtube?
That is a whole different kind of experience.

Terms of Service Didn't Read is a project that wants to fix what they call the biggest lie on the internet. 
almost no one really reads the terms of service we agree to all the time.     
So they read them and they give them ratings to grades their quality: from very good (Class A) to very bad (Class E)

The homepage reads: Terms of service are often too long to read, but it's important to understand what's in them. Your rights online depend on them. We hope that our ratings can help you get informed about your rights. Do not hesitate to click on a service below, to have more details! 

If you scroll down you see the sites and services that they have been reviewing.

There is Youtube, which has a class D rating; Class D is code orangs, which means it is not very good

# open https://tosdr.org/#youtube
if you click on the logo you get more details. 
It reads: The terms of service of Youtube are very uneven or there are some important issues that need your attention.

The first issue mentioned is:
Terms may be changed any time at their discretion, without notice to the user 
They can change the terms of service any time they see fit, even without notification to the user. Your use of the service supposedly constitutes acceptance of the changes in the terms.

*CONSEQUENCES
# open https://support.google.com/legal/answer/4558836?hl=en&ref_topic=4558877#question4
what are the consequences of copyright infringement in google
For Google, the consequences of copyright infringement are simple. We comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Under this law, we may, when properly notified, disable access to content that violates applicable copyright law.

this is important: it means we are under American law. because google resides in California, United States laws apply to the content that we upload, or broadcast in case of a live event such as this one. 

# open visi.on.air https://www.youtube.com/royalacademyantwerp/live

# open https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3367684?hl=en&ref_topic=9282614
we are in a live broadcast. The terms have some interesting passages on this: 
lets read this passage as well: 

copyright issues with live streams
When third-party content is identified, a placeholder image may replace your live stream. You’ll be warned to stop streaming the third-party content. If you comply with this warning and address the issues, your stream can continue.
If the third-party content remains in your stream, your live stream will be temporarily interrupted or terminated. Your stream can also be terminated if you get a copyright or Community Guidelines strike.

so again, it is not only you deciding what you consider to be content and what can be shown through this channel, 
there are rules of the company, there are laws, there are protocols that are in play. 

In a highly normative space such as youtube that is gouverned by detecion algorhitms, playfull interventions are often used to bypass the Content ID or copyright detection algorithms. 

Let's look at some examples .

an obvious method is to change the speed of a clip, / this stretched the auidovisuals and fingerprinting will become difficult
The same goes for pitching the sound / voice.

Singing over a song that is playing in the background 
This guy is singing over Frozen 'Let It Go' to Try Avoid Copyright 
# https://youtu.be/fvf3Vau2NZM?t=136

# Public enemy cover: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NzZNiuG65I

So this changes the sound of the clip, and one effective Content ID detection filter is scanning sound profiles of uploaded material. Singing badly over a song makes it hard to detect.
'getting copyrighted' is a new term

Another, more brutal way to change the fingerprint is to insert sudden silences. Such is in this BBC program Flog it
https://youtu.be/XSHBelnrmpE?t=1633

These uploads of slightly adapted materials are playful forms of resistance without saying 'I do not agree'. Affirmative refusal?

The fun for many uploaders is to try to outsmart the algorithms, 
and to see how long their upload will survive on youtube.

But in the end they are confirmative actions, they confirming and feeding the capitalist logic of big corporate tech. 

*CONSTANT
I find it inspirational that artists and people in culture question forms of digital dependency by hosting, making, imagining their own infrastructures. To think of the spaces, the cables, the ways in which we work together, online or in the flesh, as being part of the artistic work of media making that opens up new spaces for imaginations and connections.

I find it quite beautiful to think of media-infrastructure as something that you can embody. So the open question that we will end with, is inspired by the Indymedia credo 'Don't hate the media, be the media

What media would we want to be?

The future lies in the new patterns we can create together, new forms of relation that include liveable forms of indifference. The future lies in unusual collaborations that both respect and challenge methods and insights, across disciplines and institutions. Queerying Homophily / Wendy Hui Kyong Chun

# peter@constantvzw.org

Some links: 

https://constantvzw.org/site/

Constant open letters for reclaiming digital infrastructures:
https://constantvzw.org/wefts/elephant.en.html
https://constantvzw.org/site/Dear-student-teacher-worker-in-an-educational-institution,3347.html

Calafou, a 'network of cooperatives, individual projects and housing in a collectivised area'
https://calafou.org/

Varia, 'een ruimte voor het ontwikkelen van collectieve benaderingen rondom alledaagse technologie.
http://varia.zone/

Etherbox, Manuals for interdependent local-server making
version 1: https://networksofonesown.constantvzw.org/etherbox/manual.html
version 2: https://networksofonesown.varia.zone/