Date
May 2018
Type
PublicationContexte
Article coécrit avec Guillaume Helleu dans la revue Multitudes, no 71, dossier « Dériver la finance », été 2018.
Résumé
Le protocole Bitcoin (2009) s’inscrit dans le prolongement des utopies crypto-anarchistes visant à développer une monnaie numérique sécurisée et distribuée sur le réseau Internet pour échapper à la centralisation du pouvoir par les banques et les gouvernements. Récupérées en grande partie par la finance spéculative, ces technologies à chaînes de blocs (blockchain) se sont progressivement développées et dépassent désormais largement le champ monétaire (applications distribuées, contrats intelligents, jetons de valeurs, etc.). Malgré la persistance de certains freins sociaux et techniques, les protocoles blockchain pourraient-ils prendre de vitesse la logique destructrice du capitalisme financier ?
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
September 2022
Type
PublicationContexte
Paper written with Guillaume Helleu for the journal AOC, which appeared in September 2022. Translated from French by Aviva Cashmira Kakar.
Résumé
NFTs (non-fungible tokens) appeared in 2017. They are tamper-proof decentralized digital certificates which have gained fame because of their appropriation by the art world. NFTs have attracted a great deal of controversy, and are frequently accused of being speculative, useless and polluting. We propose to examine these polemics, founded for the most part, in order to show that other approaches are possible. In fact, artistic applications are merely one link in the chain, and NFTs cannot be reduced to their mere visible aspect, they require a wider examination of their value systems, distribution chains, and methods of governance.
Date
November 2021
Type
PublicationContexte
Paper written with Guillaume Helleu for the research journal Multitudes, which appeared in November 2021. Translated from French by Aviva Cashmira Kakar.
Résumé
This paper explores the issues concerning blockchain technologies within the realm of the creative (art, design, video games, etc.), which have arisen since the development of non-fungible tokens (or NFTs) in 2015. NFTs are essentially the production of a decentralized digital certificate that is impossible to forge, which is then linked to a numerical or tangible entity. NFTs have emerged into the mainstream since the beginning of 2021 due to a massive surge in sales and the development of specified marketplaces. NFTs have brought to the fore a variety of issues concerning value, circulation, and the exposure of artistic and cultural productions.
Notions
Date
May 2023
Type
PublicationContexte
Anthony Masure, Guillaume Helleu, “The improvised economics to the Web3,” LSD, no 3, May 2023, pp. 175-183
Résumé
Emerging in 2017, NFT s (Non Fungible Tokens), are un-forgeable, decentralised certificates that have become famous through their use in the art world. While this usage is what has brought them media attention, they actually are simply one part of a far wider technological movement often marketed as “Web3” 1 Appeared with Ethereum as a response to the Web 2.0 of the GAFAM, the Web3 proposes an all-in-one ecosystem: a monetary system (Bitcoin) within an economic system (DeFi) to exchange digital assets (NFT s), the whole managed by a governance system (DAO) using digital identities (DID s).. Web3, or the new order of Web To understand the workings of this new iteration of the Web based on decentralised blockchain 2 The term blockchain refers to a distributed ledger for storing, certifying and sharing information in a decentralised manner. The data is replicated in multiple storage spaces, forming a public chain secured by the addition of the various nodes of the network. This chain is designed to make information unalterable and transactions unfalsifiable. technologies, first we have to review its predecessors. Invented in 1989 by Tim Berners-Lee at the Cern, the Web - which later came to be called Web 1.0 - brought the promise of a utopia where all the world’s scientific knowledge could be shared through simplified publication proto-cols. However, as it turned out, it was too technically complex for use by the general public. This “read-only mode” allowing for nothing more than the consulta-fion of documents gave rise to corresponding marketing strategies for devices such as the laptops, smartphones and modems that occupy such a central place in our daily lives and yet were not conceived as servers suitable to function as Web sites able to store and manage information. This problem of access was addressed by the Web 2.0 that arose in the 2000s with the development of participative platforms such as social media (Flickr, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) where anyone can create an account and share information on a mass scale. The main problem with the “platformisation” of the Web paradigm that predominates today resides in the non-distribution of the value produced by Web users and its increasing centralisation. Reacting against the hegemony of the GAFAM s 3 The term blockchain refers to a distributed ledger for storing, certifying and sharing information in a decentralised manner. The data is replicated in multiple storage spaces, forming a public chain secured by the addition of the various nodes of the network. This chain is designed to make information unalterable and transactions unfalsifiable. (and their Asian avatars), the renewed promise of decentralisation raised by the Web3 could restore ownership and control over their data to ordinary Web users. Five key principles will mark this historic shift: 1 – A monetary system Bitcoin 4 Bitcoin (฿, 2009) is a decentralised digital protocol that allows transactions of monetary values independently of traditional financial institutions and fat currencies. It was invented by a person, or group of anonymous people, using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. (2009) and other cryptocurrencies will play a key role. 2 – An economic system D e F i (Decentralised Finance) can be defined as a financial transaction environment that no longer requires traditional intermediaries such as brokers, exchanges and banks. Various D e F i protocols like Compound (2019) and Uniswap (2018) create gateways between traditional and decentralised economies through the introduction of “stablecoins” (Tether, 2014; Dai, 2017; Binance USD, 2018), value tokens 5 A token, or authentication token, is a digital representation of a value (currency, social share, artwork, etc.) verified in a blockchain. based on Fiat 6 The value of a fat currency is imposed by a state in an identified territory, and its management is entrusted to a central bank. For example, the value and distribution of the Euro is managed by the European Central Bank (ECB), while the dollar is managed by the United States Federal Reserve (FED). The word fiat is determinist. It comes from Latin and means, in the imperative mode, “Let it be done.” currencies. They make it possible to exchange these state-issued currencies without going through traditional channels (SWIFT), and they function almost instantaneously. Working 24/7 and almost impossible to stop, by January 2022 D e F i represented a market worth more than 200 billion dollars. 3 – A property system NFT s can transform any digital entity into merchandise. In the field of art, the best-known example is CryptoPunks, 10,000 files containing images (originally 24 × 24 pixels) distributed without charge over the Ethereum 7 Ethereum (2015) is a decentralised, collaborative exchange platform, originally envisioned by Vitalik Buterin as an upgrade to Bitcoin. Ethereum extends the principles of Bitcoin to move from a currency to a configurable value system, particularly via the use of smart contracts. network. Thanks to blockchain technology, there can be thousands of copies of a single CryptoPunk 8 CryptoPunks (2017) are a famous collection of NFT s representing computer-generated pixelated characters. meme, but only one of them contains a digital signature and thus has value. 4 – A governance system A project launched in April 2016 called the DAO (Decentralised Autonomous Organisation) marked the appearance of new kinds of governance that prevent fraud and corruption through previously-established rules and smart contracts 9 Smart contracts enable value to be programmed by automating the triggering of actions within a blockchain and recording the results.. While DAO s make governmental processes such as voting and the approval and execution of decisions more fluid, they raise possible concerns insofar as they can become substitutes for traditional state functions, regulatory bodies and so on justice systems, associations, unions, etc.). 5 – An identity system DID s (Decentralised Identifiers) are sure to become a major issue in the coming decades. In a world where the concept of identity has never been so much brought into question and the profiling carried out by GAFAMs so problematic, the need for a new system of identity has become obvious. Web 1.0’s traditional authentif-cation mechanisms (email and password) have been replaced, to some degree, bysociallogins (Facebook Connect, 2008; Google Sign In, 2015; Sign in with Apple, 2019), all of which entrain the problems inherent in Web 2.0 (targeted advertising, data capture, dependence on private actors, etc.). In contrast, Web3 offers new forms of online authentification through the use of wallets such as MetaMask 10 MetaMask (2016) is a digital wallet of cryptocurrencies and tokens that allows interaction with many decentralised applications and environments. (2016). These kinds of decentralised and user-owned protocols provide for a better interoperability of data while allowing users to control what they want to share. Their possible integration into Instagram and Twitter shows that we are in a transitional phase between Web 2.0 and Web3, with no guarantee, at this point, that the problems Web3 is supposed to solve will not be replaced by even more serious risks. Towards improvised economies? ? In contrast to the traditional economy where only sovereign states (or central banks) are authorised to issue currency, Web3 technologies make it possible for anyone (with the necessary technical skills) to not only create digital spaces, but even program value systems and thus economic models based on the principles of already-existing innovations like local currencies, SCOPS (Cooperative and Participative Societies) and participative financing (crowdfunding). The latter has been updated through the use of NFT s, with initiatives like Stoner Cats (2021) - an animated multi-episode entertainment series with access limited to owners of special tokens, and Hamlet Within (2022) - a documentary by the British avantgarde filmmaker Ken McMullen sold as an NFT on the Cineverse network and divided into several “unique” parts only available to token buy-ers. As McMullen explains, the artistic model (of movies) will become totally participative, thus changing the aesthetic vocabulary of the twenty-first century so that game thinking becomes predominate. In this respect, the still unstable “play-to-earn” paradigm pop-ularised by video games like Axie Infinity (2018) gives players back most of the rewards earned by the sale of in-game collectables. More generally speaking, Web3 creates new ways to use these technologies, greater economic creativity and even a kind of legal design 11 Legal design is a practice that aims to introduce and facilitate the understanding of law to all. User-centered, legal design is by definition multidisciplinary and collaborative.. Smart contracts, for example, are NFT-associated scripts that offer, among other things, the automatic distribution of the initial gains and profits from future resales, accruing either to the artist or the designer thus updating the concept of artist resale rights), or for donations to institutions such as NGO s as well as foundations that produce open-source applications like those found on the NFT platform Teia.art. These smart contracts can also serve unexpected purposes, such as allowing a piece of property to be divided into multiple fragments, setting a ceiling on resale prices, and bringing about a process of deflation based on time lapsed or external factors. Here we are approaching the farthest frontiers of the art world where artworks are produced according to rules governing the relations between humans and non-human entities. For instance, Nouns DAO (2021) is a treasury financed by the number of daily sales of an NFT. Owners can vote to use this money to support all sorts of projects. Botto (2021) is an art robot whose taste is conditioned by community members’ weekly votes. The result of this AI heuristics is automatically put up for sale as an NFT. In light of all these examples, it’s probable that the next few years will provide opportunities to study the tensions between long-standing capitalist logics (which readily appropriated the anarchist logic of Bitcoin) and new “improvised economies” that, while still embryonic, may yield more redistributive outcomes.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Date
February 2018
Type
ConférenceContexte
Communication avec Guillaume Helleu dans le cadre de la journée d’étude « Monnaie Humanum Est », dir. Brice Genre, université Toulouse – Jean Jaurès, master DTCT
Résumé
Schéma du fonctionnement technique du protocole Bitcoin, par Guillaume Helleu Contexte de la journée d’étude La monnaie en tant qu’objet culturel traverse l’histoire de nombreuses civilisations prenant des formes et des enjeux divers. Son existence ancienne et quasi universelle lui confère de multiples qualités notamment celle de prendre des formes très variables mais signi!antes des échanges entre êtres humains. Toujours en tant qu’objet culturel, elle a également une place importante dans les sociétés contemporaines fondées sur une économie de marché. Si l’objet monnaie intéresse les sciences économiques, l’anthropologie, la sociologie, la psychologie, elle est une typologie des artefacts, un sujet, très peu traité dans le champs du design. Elle se présente dés lors comme tout autre phénomène sociétal comme un objet culturel et politique au coeur des imaginaires, des pensées, et des activités humaines que souhaite embrasser et questionner le design. En 2017, on dénombre environ une trentaine de monnaies complémentaires en activité sur le territoire français (le Sol, l’Eusko, L’Abeille) et environ 5000 à l’échelle mondiale (le Wir en Suisse, le Bitcoin, le Liberty dollar aux E.U.) quand nous pouvions en compter seulement 300 en 1990. D’après Bernard Lietaer (2009) (économiste belge, professeur à l’université de Berkeley et co-fondateur de l’Euro) l’augmentation signi!cative du nombre de ces monnaies est en lien avec la crise bancaire et !nancière qui débute en 2007 au Etats-Unis pour devenir une crise économique mondiale à partir de 2008. Selon lui « l’apport des monnaies complémentaires peut permettre de résoudre les causes systémiques des crises monétaires et !nancières » et d’autre part, d’être une réponse aux « problèmes très divers auxquels nous devons faire face aujourd’hui, depuis la gestion des conséquences économiques du vieillissement de la population, ou les problèmes de développement durable ». La monnaie plus qu’un socle des systèmes financiers ou économiques est un élément fondamental des relations humaines quelles qu’elles soient dans le sens où elle caractérise le principe d’échange : fondement des sociétés humaines. Ainsi, la monnaie est envisagée par nombres d’économistes et autres spécialistes comme un outil majeur capable de redé!nir la notion de richesse (Celina Whitaker et Patrick Viveret, cofondateurs du Collectif Richesses) mais aussi et surtout de remodeler nos sociétés industrielles prises dans un ensemble complexe de problématiques climatiques, sociales, sanitaires, industrielles, etc. Dés lors, il semblerait que le design, tenu originellement par un contrat moral humaniste et en tant que discipline du projet puisse accompagner l’éclosion et la pratique de ses dispositifs monétaires alternatifs. Le design peut peut également imaginer d’autres dispositifs, afin de soutenir par exemple, comme nous le dit Celina Whithaker (2015) « l’expérimentation d’une monnaie sociale incitatrice de comportements civiques, solidaires et écologiquement responsables ». L’enjeux de cette journée d’étude est de présenter un panorama certes non exhaustif mais pluriel, des idées, des qualités, des principes, des subtilités, des aspects de la monnaie, prise sous l’angle de plusieurs intervenants appartenants à des disciplines et des cultures différentes. Enrichi par les multiples savoirs et regards apportés par les autres disciplines, le design semble à même de questionner cet objet culturel spécifique qu’est la monnaie.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
December 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Conférence pour le MasterCard Innovation Forum 2022, Paris, Stade de France.
Résumé
Le déploiement du metavers, l’essor des crypto-monnaies et des NFT dessinent les contours d’un futur disruptif. L’édition 2022 du MasterCard Innovation Forum qui se tiendra le 8 décembre interroge toutes ces dimensions, cherche à cerner les opportunités, dessiner les limites et imaginer les solutions pour qu’émerge un futur responsable.
Date
February 2023
Type
ConférenceContexte
Anthony Masure, Guillaume Helleu, « Web3 and mixed reality: when design meets decentralization », communication dans le cadre de la ARUP East Asia Design School, « Other Tomorrows: Exploring how we live, work and connect in 2035 », T.H.E Design, Hong Kong, 17 février 2023
Résumé
Following the meeting of immersive (mixed reality) and Web3 technologies (opened by the Ethereum blockchain in 2015), the boundary between the physical and virtual worlds has never been so thin. The link between these two sectors has major implications for interior design, which has become an expanded field from video games to “impossible spaces” (4D, non-Euclidean perspective, etc.). This lecture will study the the future of architectural practices. What are the new business models and value chains opened by these technologies? What could be an “authentic” digital or a decentralized architecture? What are the consequences in terms of creation?
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
November 2014
Type
PublicationContexte
Anthony Masure, «Visual Culture. Open Source Publishing, Git et le design graphique», Strabic.fr, novembre 2014
Résumé
Le collectif Open Source Publishing (OSP) propose aux designers graphiques de s’inspirer des méthodes de programmation informatique en vigueur depuis de nombreuses années, notamment dans le logiciel libre. Placé en financement collaboratif (crowdfunding) en novembre 2014 sur la plateforme Kiss Kiss Bank Bank, leur projet « Visual culture, un outil pour le design collaboratif (avec Git) » nous donne ainsi une parfaite occasion d’envisager des façons de faire du graphisme qui ne soient pas marquées par les logiques dominantes type Adobe.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
January 2026
Type
PublicationContexte
Article de recherche co-écrit avec Saul Pandelakis et Dominika Čupková dans le cadre du projet Fucking Tech! (2024-2027) et publié dans INC Longform (Institute of Network Cultures) en janvier 2026.
Résumé
À partir d’une semaine d’expérimentation avec onze applications d’« AI Girlfriends », ce texte examine ces services comme des artefacts culturels toucahnt aux notions de genre, de plaisir, d’amour et de psychologie. Appliquant une méthode de « recherche hypersituée », les auteurs décrivent leurs interactions avec des chatbots dédiés à la romance et à la sexualité pour en analyser les promesses (personnalisation, disponibilité permanente, absence de censure) et leurs angles morts (consentement automatisé, biais cishetéronormatifs, incohérences entre texte et image générée). Ils concluent sur la nécessité de repenser ces interfaces au-delà des imaginaires normatifs.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Date
April 2018
Type
ConférenceContexte
Présentation du groupe de recherche CinéDesign à l’occasion de la table-ronde « Industry and Cinema », conférences Cumulus « To Get There: Designing Together », ÉSAA Duperré
Résumé
Industry and Cinema: what place for the creator in the organization of work? (Hierarchy, status, role of each member in the global chain). If we consider that the working world is an organization which requires skills and expertise in order to optimize creative, technical and economic performances, then it becomes interesting to question the human and structural issues implemented in this complex network. How does the creative act reveal itself, define itself and participate in a global process within an industrial chain, and more specifically in the world of film?
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Date
December 2019
Type
PublicationContexte
Version enriched with a chapter of the essay Design and digital humanities (2017), translation from French by Jesse Cohn], Berlin, Interface Critique, dir. Florian Hadler, Daniel Irrgang, Alice Soiné, no 2, “Navigating the Human”
Résumé
Télécharger l’article en PDF Voir l’article [En ligne « Human, All Too Human is the monument to a crisis. It calls itself a book for free spirits: almost every sentence is the manifestation of a victory – I used it to liberate myself from things that did not belong to my nature. Idealism is one of them: the title says “where you see ideal things, I see – human, oh, only all too human!”… I know people better. The term “free spirit” does not want to be understood in any other way: a spirit that has become free, that has taken hold of itself again. — Friedrich Nietzsche 1 Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecce Homo [1888], in: The Anti-Christ, Ecce Homo, Twilight of the Idols: And Other Writings, ed. Aaron Ridley and Judith Norman (Cambridge, England 2005), pp. 115–116. In this seemingly autobiographical fragment, Nietzsche refers back to his book Human, All Too Human [1876-1878]. In current discussions of “interface design,” catchphrases such as “user-centered design,” “the user experience,” and by extension, “experience design” might not, at first glance, seem to draw scrutiny. After all, isn’t the purpose of design to create ‘useful’ things based on the users’ needs, ‘centered’ on them and on the improvement of their ‘experience’? However, if one looks at these concepts more closely, one might wonder what these methods engage as conceptions of design, and more broadly as an understanding of human relations and human-machine relations. Indeed, it is not unproblematic to presuppose that “we” are users first and foremost, i.e. beings solely concerned with relations of utility. What are we to think, then, of terms such as “user-centered design (UCD) 2 Shawn Lawton Henry, Justin Thorp, Notes on User Centered Design Process (UCD). W3C.org (March 2004), http://www.w3.org/WAI/redesign/ucd, access: July, 1, 10:00pm., ” “human-centered design (HCD) 3 Human-Centered Design Toolkit. Ideo (2009), http://www.ideo.com/work/human-centered-design-toolkit, access: July, 1, 10:00pm.,” “activity-centered design (ACD)4 See Geraldine Gay, Helene Hembrooke, Activity-Centered Design. An Ecological Approach to Designing Smart Tools and Usable Systems (Cambridge, MA 2004).,” or “people-centered design (PCD)5 Hugh Graham, People-Centered Design. hughgrahamcreative.com, http://hughgrahamcreative.com/people-centered-design, access: July, 1, 10:00pm.”? Why must design be “centered” on something? More broadly, aren’t there some aspects of human life that can’t be replaced by the “experiences” generated by “user-centered” design? In order to critique the engineering of design and the reduction of the designer’s task to normative and even quantitative methodologies, I propose, as a research method, to bring together an historical study of the concepts to be questioned with technical analyses and the related discourses surrounding them. More precisely, I could synthesize this text’s research method in the following way 6 Here, I borrow the useful summary provided by Alexandre Saint-Jevin in his review of the essay Design et humanités numérique s: Alexandre Saint-Jevin, Sur la trace de l’humain dans les « objets » de design. Non-Fiction (2018),: 1 . To analyze the concept determining the process by which design issues were constructed in order to draw out the underlying philosophical concepts. 2 . To retrace the genealogy of this concept, connecting the technical reality of the products of design with the discourses of all entities being at the origin of the project (originators, designers, contractors, communicators, marketers, etc.) regarding these products. 3 . To synthesize the history and the discourses of these entities concerning matters of design more broadly in order to draw out the philosophical issues entailed in them. 4 . To connect the philosophical issues revealed by the analysis of the discourses of the entities with those of the original concept to show how these come to condition and determine the technical reality. This is thus not a matter of constructing a model of design activity in the form of logical sequences (diagrams, schemata, timelines, etc): rather than trying to tell designers what they should do, this analysis is intended to provide them with critical tools allowing them to analyze, in their own process, what they have already made or are still working on. In order to open up possibilities for making interfaces other than the behavioral scripts of experiential design, I will begin my analysis by turning back to the history of the first graphic interfaces. How do the values embedded within these technological strata infuse and even limit our relations to technology? Xerox Star’s “conceptual model of the user” The expression “user interface” correlates temporally with the development of microcomputers at the end of the 1960s. In 1968, Douglas Engelbart presented the result of the research undertaken at Xerox PARC at the time of an event retrospectively called the “mother of all demos”, where were first showcased videoconferencing, teleconferencing, email, the hypertext navigation system, and the interface modeled on the “office metaphor” based on “windows,” “folders,” the “trash,” etc. Partially realized in the 1973 Xerox Alto 7 Only 1500 units were produced: 1000 for employees of Xerox and the remainder for universities and public institutions. computer, this first form of graphic user interface (GUI) was included in the 1981 Xerox Star. Moreover, the latter was accompanied by network access, email capabilities, a mouse, and a WYSIWIG (What You See Is What You Get) printing system precise enough to make what is seen on the screen coincide with a paper output. In order to specify the origin of the conceptual model used as a basis for a design explicitly asserting needs of “users,” it is important to reconsider the founding principles of the Xerox Star. In an article dating from 1982, five former employees of Xerox Corporation explain their comprehension of the human-machine relations, and more precisely their methodology of interface design: “We have learned from Star the importance of formulating the fundamental concepts (the user’s conceptual model) before software is written, rather than tacking on a user interface afterward. […] It was designed before the functionality of the system was fully decided. It was even designed before the computer hardware was built. We worked for two years before we wrote a single line of actual product software.” 8 David Canfield Smith, Charles Irby, Ralph Kimball, Bill Verplank, and Eric Harslem, Designing the Star User Interface. Byte 4 (1982), p. 246. Reprinted online: Contemporary readers, used to design being relegated to the end of a process, dependent on a multitude of external parameters, will certainly wonder at the attribution of such importance to design “before” the material specifications are even formulated. In the case of the Star, it was much more a question of introducing the market to “radically new concepts”9 Ibid.p. 242. than of seeking to apply an “order” issued from above. By dedicating a quantity of memory to the screen display, the originators of the Star were able to create a visual interface functioning in tandem with the mouse (also used on Xerox Alto), defined in the 1982 text as “a way to quickly point to items on the screen 10 Ibid. p. 246.” more effective than the cursors activated by the keyboard. It is particularly interesting to study how the Xerox teams developed a project methodology linked to what is today called “user-centered design.” The development of an interface poses many problems indeed: taking into account the variety of languages in which the users address their commands to the computer, the design of on-screen representations displaying the state of the system to the user, and other abstract problems that can affect the understanding of the system’s behavior. According to the Star teams, these problems are highly subjective, and can be solved only on a case-by-case basis. The method employed thus consisted in focusing on what should precede any design of a successful interface, namely “task analysis”: ” The current task description, with its breakdown of the information objects and methods presently employed, offers a starting point for the definition of a corresponding set of objects and methods to be provided by the computer system [including programs and peripherals]. The idea behind this phase of design is to build up a new task environment for the user, in which he can work to accomplish the same goals as before, surrounded now by a different set of objects, and employing new methods.11 Ibid.p. 248. “ For Xerox, the user is an entity centrally dedicated to carrying out tasks in order to achieve objectives. One finds here the common definition of an algorithm, namely, a set of instructions intended to accomplish a given action. In other words, isn’t this understanding of what a user is derived from the “program” (an algorithm written in machine language) as a model of thought? Isn’t it odd that, in order to improve human-machine relations, human beings are to be imagined on the model of the machines? In this sense, what one would call a “user” in the data-processing context would often be merely a logical reduction of human subjectivity, consequently able to hold a dialogue with “extra-human” programs 12 I borrow this expression from the exhibition Haunted By Algorithms, a research project directed by Jeff Guess and Gwenola Wagon, Paris, ENSAPC / YGREC, January 21, 2017 – March 5, 2017.. Just as some see design as a discipline capable of becoming a science 13 See Anthony Masure, Pour une recherche en design sans modèle, in: Design et humanités numériques, ed. Anthony Masure (Paris 2, here it is a matter of constructing “models of behavior” in order to improve the effectiveness of the “tasks.” The etymology of the French noun “tâche” (“task”) can be traced back to the Latin verb “taxare” (“to tax»), indicating “a determinate work that one is obliged to perform, together with a concept of ‘remuneration’ [or] moral duty 14 Alain Rey (dir.), Dictionnaire historique de la langue française, Paris, Le Robert, 2010. p. 9620–9621.”. The French verb “tâcher” (“to try to do”), in turn, expresses the idea of striving, sometimes accompanied by the idea of a degree of painful exertion in order to comply with the imperative to “try to do” something. If the user is a being whose objectives, to be realized, necessarily pass by a series of tasks to achieve, wouldn’t this make us “tâcherons” (“drudges”), i.e. “person[s] performing work on command [emphasis by the author/s] without much intelligence”? 15 Ibid.p. 248–249. In the case of the Xerox Star, nevertheless, things are more complicated. The fact of starting from a “user-model” comprised of a small set of design principles makes it possible to ensure an overall coherence, since “the user experience [acquired in] in one area… [can] apply in others 16 David Canfield Smith, Charles Irby, Ralph Kimball, Bill Verplank, and Eric Harslem, Designing the Star User Interface. Byte 4 (1982), p. 242: “The Star user interface adheres rigorously to a small set of design principles. These principles make the system seem familiar and friendly, simplify the human-machine interaction, […] and allow user experience in one area to apply in others.” Emphasis mine.,” thus reducing the cognitive load involved in the use of the computer system. Another aspect discussed in the article – connected with the concept of coherence – pertains to the concept of “familiarity” (the “Familiar User’s Conceptual Model”): “A user’s conceptual model is the set of concepts a person gradually acquires to explain the behavior of a system […] The first task for a system designer is to decide what model is preferable for users […]. This extremely important step is often neglected or done poorly. The [Xerox] Star designers devoted several work-years […] [to] evolving […] an appropriate model for an office information system: the metaphor of a physical office.”17 Ibid.p. 252. The Xerox Star interface was thus constructed on the basis of the users’ current universe, namely, the hierarchical model of the office. It was important to produce a “familiar” interface in order to reduce sources of friction, making the “user experience” seamless. Thus, users find in the machine their customary division, organization, and management of tasks. For example, the pile of paper messages on the physical desk of office-worker users is translated, in their computer, into a pictogram of an envelope indicating when a new email has been received. It is interesting to specify that the metaphorical model defined in advance of the actual development of the program de facto modifies the functions of this program: the design is not approached as a matter of mere presentation. Taking the example of the emails once again, typing a “send mail” command can thus be avoided by manipulating the icons. A last important aspect of the Star interface pertains to the personalization of the interface, as the movable icons make it possible to configure the work environment. Summarizing the overall principles of the Xerox Star, what is indicated here by the term “user” is in fact a succession of goal-directed “tasks” from which the designers construct a “conceptual model” as a basis for the developing of the computer system and ensuring its metaphorical coherence. By providing users with a “familiar” and “friendly” environment, the interface thus developed is intended to increase their productivity by developing “human-machine synergism.” However, the Xerox Star’s “friendly” interface reveals its limitations in certain functions where the office metaphor is inoperative: “One of the raisons d’être for Star is that physical objects do not provide people with enough power to manage the increasing complexity of the “information age.” For example, we can take advantage of the computer’s ability to search rapidly by providing a search function for its electronic file drawers, thus helping to solve the long-standing problem of lost files.” 18 Ibid.p. 282. The 1982 article concludes on an intriguing note, observing that it is difficult to choose between several models of interfaces while relying on stable (scientific) criteria: “User-interface design is still an art, not a science.” 19 Ibid. : « User-interface design is still an art, not a science. » Although the Xerox Star text ultimately pleads for the establishment of a “more rigorous process” for the development of interfaces, such an assertion must elicit the contemporary reader’s curiosity. The emergence of “rationalized” graphic operating systems In spite of the commercial failure of Xerox Star, these design methods will be a success, definitively changing our relations with electronic machines. A precursor of the research conducted to Xerox PARC, Jef Raskin’s thesis in computer science, Quick-Draw Graphic System, published in 1967 (i.e., 6 years before the Xerox Alto 20 At the beginning of the Seventies, the IBM Usability lab was solely concerned with ergonomics. The Psychology of Computer Programming was published by Gerald Marvin Weinberg in 1971, and the work of Stuart K. Card, Allen Newell and Thomas P. Moran was only made known to the general public after the publication of The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction in 1983.), argued for a data-processing environment in which the graphic interface would hold a dominant place. Such an idea was not at all self-evident at the end of the 1960s: “The most heretical statement I made […] was that my work was based on a “design and implementation philosophy which demanded generality and human usability over execution speed and efficiency.” This at a time when the main aim of computer science courses was to teach you to make programs run fast and use as little memory as possible.” 21 Dr. Bob, Articles from Jef Raskin about the history of the Macintosh. Dr Bob Tech Blog (2013), https://drbobtechblog.com/articles-from-jef-raskin-about-the-history-of-the-macintosh/, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. After contacts with Xerox concerning the development of the mouse, Jef Raskin was hired by Apple in 1978. It is under his impetus and that of Bill Atkinson 22 The title of Jef Raskin’s thesis (A Hardware-Independent Computer Drawing System Using List-Structured Modeling: The Quick-Draw Graphics System, Pennsylvania State University, 1967) was echoed when Bill Atkinson named the Macintosh’s graphics package. that Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak took note of the research conducted by Xerox PARC on graphic interfaces. Everyone of us knows the rest of the story. In 1979, the CEO of Apple Inc., Steve Jobs, age 24, visited the Xerox facility. In a 1995 documentary, he recalls the shock which this event constituted for him: “They [Xerox] showed me […] three things. […]. One of the things they showed me was object orienting programming […]. The other one they showed me was a networked computer system [of a hundred computers] […]. I didn’t even see that. I was so blinded by the first thing […] which was the graphical user interface. I thought it was the best thing I’d ever seen in my life. Now remember it was very flawed, what we saw was incomplete […] [But, at the time,] within […] ten minutes it was obvious to me that all computers would work like this some day.” 23 Steve Jobs, Triumph of the Nerds: The Rise of Accidental Empires. Documentation. PBS.org (1996), http://www.pbs.org/nerds, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. Following this presentation, obtained in exchange for shares in Apple Inc., Steve Jobs launched the Apple LISA micro-computer, which took the principles of the mouse and the graphic interface from Xerox Star, in 1982. With a price that was too high ($10,000 at the time, or $24,000 today), the LISA was replaced by the much more financially accessible Macintosh, released in 1984. While many still think that Steve Jobs did little more than “steal” the key principles of the Xerox Alto, the history is more complicated than that. The leaders of Xerox had not yet recognized the decisive consequences of what they had discovered, leaving their prospective vision in the hands of the sales and marketing teams, which were focused on photocopiers, the core of the brand, and not on the new market for computers 24 For a detailed history of the Xerox company, see: Douglas K. Smith and Robert C. Alexander, Fumbling the Future: How Xerox Invented, then Ignored, the First Personal Computer (New York 1988).. Bill Atkinson would have to rewrite and improve the quantity of functions in order for the LISA, and then the Macintosh, to take advantage of a “superior” graphic interface (with the addition of scrolling menus, the opening of windows with a double-click, the trash icon, etc). No line of code was “copied and pasted,” strictly speaking 25 Christoph Dernbach, Did Steve Jobs steal everything from Xerox PARC? Mac History (February 2012), http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2012-03-22/apple-and-xerox-parc, access: July, 1, 10:00pm.. In order to bolster the supply of software for Apple machines, at the beginning of the 1980s, Steve Jobs invited Microsoft to publish programs for the Macintosh. In spite of Jobs’ request to Bill Gates (then CEO of Microsoft) not to use a mouse-controlled graphic interface before the Macintosh (1984) had been on sale for a year, Microsoft surprised everyone by announcing the operating system Windows 1.0 in 1983 26 Windows 1.0 was not yet a complete operating system, but rather a “graphic shell” that could be used by third-party software. , although it would only make its official debut in 1985. When Jobs, furious, accused Bill Gates of having betrayed him, Gates replied that they had both stolen from their “rich neighbor, Xerox.”27 Andy Hertzfeld, A Rich Neighbor Named Xerox. Folklore.org (November 1983), https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=A_Rich_Neighbor_Named_Xerox.txt, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. See also : Andy Hertzfeld, How the Mac was born, and other tales. Conversation with Scott Ard. CNET (January 2005), http://news.cnet.com/How-the-Mac-was-born%2C-and-other-tales/2100-1082_3-5529081.html, access: July, 1, 10:00pm.. The suit brought against Microsoft by Apple in 1988 was unsuccessful in the courts. Don Norman: the limits of the “user experience” After the release of Microsoft Windows, the design methods used in interface design were structured around scientific disciplines connected with this field. In addition to the expressions “human usability” and “user interface,” that of “user experience” (often shortened to “UX”) then achieved a notable success. The latter seems to appear for the first time in 1986 28 For a detailed chronology of the history of this term, see: Peter Merholz, Whither “User Experience”? Peterme.com (November 1998), http://www.peterme.com/index112498.html, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. in a book co-edited with Donald Norman (a cognitive science researcher), titled User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction 29 Donald A. Norman and Stephen W. Draper, User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction (San Diego 1986).. After a consideration of the impossibility of arriving at a univocal meaning by means of standardized images (pictograms), this quotation follows: “Direct Engagement occurs when a user experiences direct interaction with the objects in a domain. Here, there is a feeling of involvement directly with a world of objects rather than of communicating with an intermediary. The interactions are much like interacting with objects in the physical world. […] [T]he interface and the computer become invisible. Although we believe this feeling of direct engagement to be of critical importance […] we know little about the actual requirements for producing it.”30 Edwin L. Hutchins, James D. Hollan, and Donald A. Norman, Direct Manipulation Interfaces, in: User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, ed. Donald A. Norman and Stephen W. Draper (San Diego 1986), pp. 114-115. “User experience” can thus be understood as a will to export the Xerox Star design model to fields other than that of screen interfaces and computers which can disappear, becoming “invisible.” Frequently cited as the originator of this expression, Don Norman defined it as follows in 1998: “I invented the term [user experience] because I thought Human Interface and usability 31 The concept of “usability” that Don Norman judges insufficient, was addressed by its proponents, Jeff Rubin and Dana Chisnell, in these terms: “when a product or service is truly usable, the user can do what he or she wants to do the way he or she expects to be able to do it, without hindrance, hesitation, or questions.” Source: Jeff Rubin and Dana Chisnell, Handbook of Usability Testing. Second Edition. How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests (Indianapolis 2008 [1994]), p. 4. were too narrow: I wanted to cover all aspects of the person’s experience with a system, including industrial design, graphics, the interface, the physical interaction, and the manual.” 32 Don Norman, quoted in: Peter Merholz, Whither ‘User Experience’? This broader aspect of “user experience” was then refined in the “canonical” version formulated by Jakob Nielsen and Don Norman: “User experience” encompasses all aspects of the end-user’s interaction with the company, its services, and its products. The first requirement for an exemplary user experience is to meet the exact needs of the customer […]. We should also distinguish UX and usability: According to the definition of usability, it is a quality attribute of the UI, covering whether the system is easy to learn, efficient to use, pleasant, and so forth. Again, this is very important, and again total user experience is an even broader concept.” 33 Jakob Nielsen and Don Norman, The Definition of User Experience. Nielsen Norman Group, http://www.nngroup.com/articles/definition-user-experience, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. “Experience design” and the myth of “invisible” data processing This interest, from then on focusing on the user rather than the technological apparatus (the interface), is even more explicit in the phrase “user-centered design” (“UCD”), which consists in basing the whole methodology of design on the central point that is the user. This design methodology enjoyed considerable success, perhaps because of the bond it helped establish between the marketing services tasked with studying consumers and the teams tasked with designing the products. However, by the admission of its own proponent, Don Norman, the term “user” has shown its limitations. In a 2006 article titled “Words Matter. Talk About People: Not Customers, Not Consumers, Not Users,” Don Norman admitted: “We depersonalize the people we study by calling them “users.” Both terms are derogatory. They take us away from our primary mission: to help people. […] People are rich, complex beings. […] A label such as customer, consumer or user ignores [their] […] social structures. […] It is time to wipe words such as consumer, customer, and user from our vocabulary. Time to speak of people. Power to the people.”34 Don Norman, Words Matter. Talk About People: Not Customers, Not Consumers, Not Users. jnd.org (2008), http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/words_matter_talk_a.html, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. In the same way, in 2008: “One of the horrible words we use is “users.” I am on a crusade to get rid of the word “users.” I would prefer to call them “people.” […] We design for people, we don’t design for users.” 35 Don Norman at UX Week 2008, Adaptive Path. YouTube, https://youtu.be/WgJcUHC3qJ8, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. Let us summarize these points. The methodology of “user-centered design” consists in designing so as to treat each human being as a user, as a person dedicated to maintaining with companies only relations “centered” on his or her “exact needs,”36 Jakob Nielsen and Don Norman, The Definition of User Experience. Nielsen Norman Group, http://www.nngroup.com/articles/definition-user-experience, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. concerning which there should be no “hindrance[s], hesitation[s], or questions.”37 Jeff Rubin and Dana Chisnell, Handbook of Usability Testing. How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests (New York 2008), p. 4. This current of thought results from a scientific modeling of the principles that governed the design of the Xerox Star in order to make it a “personal” machine, optimizing the tasks to be performed by the user. Retrospectively, the performative texts of Don Norman speaking in praise of the study of “needs,” by the admission of their author, led to a dead end, because the human being cannot be reduced to a specific role 38 This idea was inscribed within the ISO standards, which propose replacing the expression “user-centered experience” with “human-centred design.” See: ISO 9241-210: 2010. Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. Iso.org (March 2010), https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/en/#iso:std:iso:9241:-210:ed-1:v1:en, access: July, 1, 10:00pm.. Such a reversal of thought might be amusing. However, on closer inspection, wouldn’t one also have to interpret these contradictory injunctions as the sign of a power belonging not to the “people,” but to those who make these speeches? In other words, isn’t this an indictment of those who are constantly getting richer (in the banal sense of the term) by controlling the circulation of the design methodologies that are to be gotten rid of by this “crusade”? More than a plea in favor of taking complexity into account in design, this “appeal to the human,” for Don Norman, provides a rationale for gradually eliminating “interfaces” in the name of an “invisible” computing 39 Donald A. Norman, The Invisible Computer. Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer Is So Complex, and Information Appliances Are the Solution (Cambridge MA, 1998)., the products of which would be “human-centered.”40 Chapter 2 of The Invisible Computer is titled “Growing up: Moving from technology-centered to human-centered products.” This prediction of invisibility, passing under the guise of a change in vocabulary, a priori innocent, was so absorbed so thoroughly by the corporations that in 2012, Apple made it into a selling point: “We believe technology is at its very best when it’s invisible, when you’re conscious only of what you’re doing, not the device you’re doing it with. An iPad is the perfect expression of that idea. It’s just this magical pane of glass. It can become anything you want it to be […] It’s a more personal experience with technology than people have ever had.” 41 Official Apple (New) iPad Trailer. YouTube (March 2012), https://youtu.be/RQieoqCLWDo , access: July, 1, 10:00pm. However, Don Norman’s big picture does not mean that his idea of “invisible” computing is viable. The important term here is “experience,” which goes hand in hand with that of “magic.” What could be more magical, indeed, than experiencing an “invisible” technology? The artist Olia Lialina, in a critical article on the study of the concept of user, does not join in the chorus: “This is why Interface Design starts to rename itself to Experience Design — whose primary goal is to make users forget that computers and interfaces exist. With Experience Design there is only you and your emotions to feel, goals to achieve, tasks to complete. ” 42 Olia Lialina, Turing Complete User (2012), http://contemporary-home-computing.org/turing-complete-user/, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. A world without experience In the conclusion of her article studying the limitations of an exclusion of the term user of the methods of interface design, Olia Lialina proposes to return to foundations predating the Xerox Star, namely those developed by the computer scientist Ted Nelson in his 1974 work Computer Lib/Dream Machine: “COMPUTING HAS ALWAYS BEEN PERSONAL. By this I mean that if you weren’t intensely involved in it, sometimes with every fiber in your mind atwitch, you weren’t doing computers, you were just a user. If you get involved, it involves all of you: your heart and mind and way of doing things and your image of yourself. A whole way of life.” 43 Theodor Holm Nelson, Computer Lib. You can and must understand computers now (self-published, revised edition 1987 [1974]), p. 3. The argument is strong. Nelson’s denunciation of a “naïve” use points to the risk of a loss of contact with the computer, which, from Xerox Star to the iPad, presupposes that everything “real” (real life, creativity, etc) is external to the machine. However, in spite of the ascendancy of tactile interfaces (without mouses), in spite of the emergence of gestural interfaces (without buttons) and sound interfaces (without screens), and in spite of the return of command-line interfaces (without icons), it is clear that the great principles of the graphic interfaces created at Xerox PARC at the beginning of the 1970s are still the main ones governing our relations with electronic machines – which are not yet “invisible,” far from it. Take, for example, the “Apple Human Interface Guidelines” 44 See for example: “Designing for Yosemite: […] A great OS X app integrates seamlessly into this environment, while at the same time providing custom functionality and a unique user experience.” Human Interface Guidelines, developer.apple.com, https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. and Google’s “Material Design,” 45 Google Material Design, material.io (first version published June 2014), https://www.google.com/design/spec/material-design/introduction.html, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. which, in the 2010s, are the recommended readings – with the proviso of reading critically – for anyone interested in interface design. In spite of its widespread acceptance, the cognitive model of an interface coupled with an idealized user (understood as a bundle of habits) has its limitations. Since Jef Raskin’s 1967 text associating “human usability” with efficient task completion 46 See Jef Raskin, A Hardware-Independent Computer Using List-Structured Modeling: The Quick-Draw Graphics System (Pennsylvania, 1967)., the will to create a graphic interface to procure for the “user” a new work environment and new methods “to accomplish the same goals as before” 47 David Canfield Smith, Charles Irby, Ralph Kimball, Bill Verplank, and Eric Harslem, Designing the Star User Interface, p. 248. has consisted in envisaging electronic media as “problem solvers” rather than as powers of transformation and invention. However, as the humanities specialist Yves Citton perceptively notes: “The invention of communication technologies […] takes place within a vast nebula of hopes, anxieties, dreams, tinkerings, parallel knowledges, subversive appropriations and reappropriations, crossing many traditional disciplinary fields […]. Indeed, our media cannot be reduced to mere instruments for the transmission of forms and contents: it functions, first and foremost, in just the same way as the mediums who fascinate us, delude us, hypnotize us and stimulate us via simulations that penetrate our senses.” 48 Yves Citton, Gestes d’humanités. Anthropologie sauvage de nos expériences esthétiques (Paris, 2012), pp. 21–22. Taking into consideration these foundational design texts of the computer age, it is obvious that electronic machines raise questions that did not exist before. But perhaps it is precisely against these innovations that methodologies of design were themselves designed with an eye to preserving the powers and knowledges already in place. In spite of its undeniably advanced technology, the Xerox Star did not have the full support of the corporate leaders, who preferred to focus on the photocopier business, more in phase with the “uses” of the time. In this history of “user-centered design,” an expression originating after the Xerox Star, it is indeed a matter of a concern about forgetting the “useful,” the utility of the object. But is this really possible in a world in which marketing services, for example, constantly seek to anticipate consumers’ “needs ” by statistical processes linked to observation protocols? Another factor suggesting a design constructing against technological innovations – i.e., for habits – is this history of the “center,” a term which should now be examined. This twofold suffix coupled with design could have been the subject of variations. Why does one never speak, for example, of “form-centered” design, for example, or of “practice-centered” design? Perhaps is this because these two concepts (there could be others) resist the idea of a “center,” of delimitation. If one considers the concept of form, it is notable that this, historically, was related to design – according to the formula of the architect Louis Sullivan, according to which “form ever follows function.” As a canny observer of a history that sometimes “tramples” (in which the issues are sometimes obscured, sometimes rediscovered), the philosopher Pierre-Damien Huyghe notes that the concept of form expresses the “artistic interest” of design: “It was not only a question of creating potentially functional objects. The concern for making form is absolutely essential to the design. We may note here that the Latin forma can be translated as “beauty.””49 Pierre-Damien Huyghe, On appelle beaucoup trop de choses ‘design’. Interview with Julie Delem. Naja21 (April 2015), http://www.naja21.com/fr/espace-journal/pierre-damien-huyghe-on-appelle-beaucoup-trop-de-choses-design, access: July, 1, 10:00pm. In a more general way, design, in so far as it encompasses the capacity to transform the world, cannot “center” on anything. Design is only of any interest if it is derived from tensions, polarities, contradictions – in other words, the opposite of a center. Olia Lialina, in the conclusion of her article, also refuses to let herself be reduced to a label: “We, general purpose users — not hackers and not people — who are challenging, consciously or subconsciously, what we can do and what computers can do, are the ultimate participants of man-computer symbiosis.” 50 Olia Lialina, Turing Complete User. One must then reconsider the fact that the conceptual model of the 1981 Xerox Star interface was decided “before” the material (hardware) existed, “two years before we wrote a single line of actual product software.” 51 David Canfield Smith, Charles Irby, Ralph Kimball, Bill Verplank, and Eric Harslem, Designing the Star User Interface, p. 246. Retrospectively, this account can be understood as that of a missed encounter with the otherness of the machines, since it is, in effect, a matter of subordinating the digital technology (hardware and software) to a “model,” i.e., to something anticipated and stabilized. This progressive distancing of the concept of the “General Purpose User” 52 Olia Lialina, Turing Complete User.op. cit (active and polyvalent) has made possible the expressions “human-centered design” and “experience design”, which incarnate the promise of a world in which one could “do whatever one wishes,” immediately, as if by “magic.” But which kind of “doing” are we talking about when invisibility becomes the ideal for the machines? This myth of the invisibility of technological innovations in fact already existed in a nascent form at the dawn of personal computing. In a 1979 commercial for the Xerox Alto intended to demonstrate the power of the “office of the future,” an office worker (Bill) arrives at work and greets his colleagues, coffee in hand. When he arrives at his station, he turns on his Alto computer and addresses it verbally: “Hello, Fred.” The computer answers him: “Hello, Bill.” After a series of tasks, easily solved by the machine, comes the final dialogue: Bill (tired): “Anything else?” Fred: A richly detailed bouquet of daisies spreads across the screen. Bill (puzzled): “Flowers? What flowers?” Fred: “Your anniversary is tonight.” Bill (chagrined): “My anniversary. I forgot.” Fred: “It’s okay. We’re only human.” 53 Douglas K. Smith and Robert C. Alexander, Fumbling the Future, (Indiana, 1999), p. 20. What such initiatives describe, paradoxically, is a world without experience [un monde sans expérience] 54 The French word expérience can mean “experience” or “experiment.” (Translator’s note.), in the sense in which experience/experimentation can take place only within a field of possibilities open to uncertainty: Economic power is what the socialization of experiences implements. However, if this implementation augments shared experience and perception day by day, it does not appear authentically. Most often, it borrows the forms of habit, it slips mimetically into experience. 55 Pierre-Damien Huyghe, Faire place, in: Qu’est-ce que l’art domestique ?, ed. Richard Conte and Sandrine Morsillo (Paris, 2006), p. 29. Symptomatic of an era when “apparatuses” 56 The apparatus is defined by Pierre-Damien Huyghe as “a technological method distinct from the tool and the machine [which produces] within us a power of perception, a particular form of sensibility.” See: Pierre-Damien Huyghe, Introduction au dossier “Temps et appareils”. Plastik 3 (2003), p. 4. are no longer objects worthy of interest, human-machine relations are increasingly marked (branded) by the registers of utility, output, or time-saving. The human experience of “experience design” is often reduced to an experimental situation, that of a rat seeking the way out of a labyrinth. Even if it is “friendly” or “invisible,” this technological medium is no less a straightjacket, a controlled situation in which any exchange is anticipated and preprogrammed. When we are mirrored in the form of the “human, all too human” computer, we “ordinary people” are the ones who stand to lose sight of our complex and infinite possibilities.
Notions
Personnes citées
Résumé
Les collectionneurs achetaient leur Van Gogh dans le plus grand secret. Aujourd’hui, sur le Web, on adore montrer les œuvres virtuelles qu’on a la richesse de s’offrir. Décryptage du nouveau paraître digital par Sophie Abriat pour la revue Madame Figaro.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Date
March 2019
Type
PublicationContexte
« Overall Technology », introduction de section coécrite avec Océane Ragoucy, dans : Catherine Geel, Clément Gaillard (dir.), Extended French Theory & The Design Field… On Nature and Ecology: A Reader, Paris, T&P Work UNiT
Résumé
Book published on the occasion of reflections adapted within the framework of the French Section, From thought to the visible. Design as large ring, XXIIth Milan Triennale, Broken Nature, March 1 st to March 1 st sup > september 2019. In the common vision of things, ecology, understood as the management of natural resources, is de facto opposed to technique: it is assumed that modernist logic has pushed technological progress to a crisis point where that progress would collapse under the finite nature of its growth. Technique as know-how or the capacity to change one’s environment is understood here, then, in its contemporary sense of “technology”: a series of technical articulations (logos) embodied in consumable artefacts. Now, the texts that follow show that ecology is multiple, just as technique should be. This plurality of life environments, a concern at the heart of the fields of art and design, dovetails with some incisive texts by the philosopher Félix Guattari. His notion of “ecosophy” (global ecology) also encourages us not to think about ecology separately from aesthetics: « To bring into being other worlds beyond those of purely abstract information, to engender Universes of reference and existential Territories where singularity and finitude are taken into consideration […] to confront the vertiginous Cosmos so as to make it inhabitable; these are the tangled paths of the tri-ecological vision [of environments, social relations and subjectivities]. 1 Félix Guattari, The three ecologies, (Paris, Galilée, 1989), 70.. » Today, gaining a clearer idea of the relations between ecology and technique implies taking a look at texts written from the 1970s onwards in the context of the Cold War and the effective development of so-called “personal” computing. The philosophy of technique, or technics, which already had a rich history, had been enjoying a tremendous period of international growth for some forty years. Because it is articulated with aesthetic and ecological issues, in France this field has been echoed in some singular ways. That is what this selection of texts sets out to explore. There is one domain, the archaeology of media, which offers a powerful counterweight to the sometimes-frightening promises of effectiveness made by these digital technologies. It does so by jolting together heterogeneous technical layers, whether of history, hardware, or software. A precursor of this field is the nomadic philosopher Vilém Flusser, whose essay Vampyroteuthis infernalis 2 Vilém Flusser, Vampyroteuthis infernalis [1981-1987], trans. C. Lucchese, (Bruxelles: Zones sensibles, 2015). sets out a bestiary derived from squids and octopuses implicitly revealing the unthought implications of the proliferation of electronic information machines. Taking different approaches, the philosophers of French Theory and their contemporary heirs (Bernard Stiegler, Pierre-Damien Huyghe, Isabelle Stengers, Bruno Latour, Madeleine Akrich, etc.) have engaged acutely with the profound consequences of technological mutations. Inspired by the idea of thinking about technique beyond human actors and/or its subservience to principle of efficacy, these authors – although they do not necessarily invoke this notion – interrogate an overly limited understanding of ecology. While they are not (all) contemporaries of the massification of the use of digital technologies, the fact that these writings are still widely studied bears witness to an obvious fact: in research, there are times when notions of novelty and progress simply do not apply. In This Progress, a participative performance (Palais de Tokyo, Paris, 2016) 3 This Progress* ( Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York, 2006) is replayed at the Palais de Tokyo, (Paris, October 12, 2016 – December 18, 2016): “Carte blanche to Tino Sehgal”, curated by Rebecca Lamarche Vadel., the German-British artist Tino Sehgal shakes up the notion of progress by activating its dimensions: personal, shared and trans-generational. One visitor’s account relates this surprising experience based on the human voice, bodily movement and social interaction: “As we moved forward alone into a big empty space, a twelve year-old child came up to us and suddenly asked, ‘What is progress?’” Let us recall elements of the historical context: the emergence of mass-market computers was to a major extent based on a cognitivist understanding of the cybernetic model. 4 For a broader understanding of cybernetics, see: Norbert Wiener, Cybernetics and society. The human use of human beings [1954], trans. P.-Y. Mistoulon, (Paris: Point, 2014).. This paradigm of understanding, which still informs to a large extent the interfaces of the digital apparatus (dispositifs) 5 Giorgio Agamben, Qu’est-ce qu’un dispositif ? [2006], trans. M. Rueff, (Paris: Payot & Rivages, 2007). » that we use every day, developed, economically, in a hidden way – covered by waves of objects renewed at a quick rate and installed among us without negotiation and unprepared by any civic reflection. In other words: we lack perspective for understanding what the digital media are doing to us, doing with us, or doing against us. The artists’ collective RYBN undermines the idea of progress and technological neutrality. By hybridising computer rationality with modes of thought based on mythology or belief, the esoteric forms of their work betray the “haunted” character of electronic machines. Their Data Ghost project 6 RYBN, Data Ghost 1, installation presented at the “Media Mediums” exhibition, curated by Jeff Guess and Gwenola Wagon, Paris, Ygrec, (April 4-May 31, 2014) (galerie Ygrec, Paris, 2014) tirelessly scans the background noises of digital data flows and detects “phantom” messages there. The internet then becomes the echo chamber of retro-inter-active ghostsspectres. Some thirty years since the writings of Félix Guattari, these reflections on the desubjectification of individuals resonate with dispositifs that are invisible (because encoded) and yet infiltrate most human activities. This is what researcher Evgeny Morozov calls “algorithmic regulation”, 7 Evgeny Morozov. “The power of data and the death of politics”. Trans. P. Jorion, August 2014. https://www.pauljorion.com/blog/2014/08/25/la-prise-de-pouvoir-par-les-donnees-et-la-mort-de-la-politique -by-evgeny-morozov/, that is, a pernicious form of social control effected by non-human agents. At the turn of the 2010s, there was no avoiding the realisation that information networks had not created a global village”. The power of “platform capitalism” 9 Nick Srnicek, Platform Capitalism. The hegemony of the digital economy [2016], trans. P. Blouin, (Montreal: Lux, 2018). – that of GAFAM and BATX – is increasingly a threat to citizens’ capacity to invent their own way of lifemodes of existence. Amassing value from the sampling of “data”, digital devices are also redoubtable machines for polluting the mind, the moment one starts to surf without a filter. In this opposition between an invasive technology and the capacity of the social body to organise its conditions of existence, ecology here acquires a psychic dimension. Since technique is constitutive of humanity, however, there can be no question of going back to a golden age that never existed. In this sense, designer Ezio Manzini pleads for an “ecology of the artificial environment” 10 Ezio Manzini, Artifacts. Towards an ecology of the artificial environment [1990], trans. Adriana Pilia, (Paris: Center Georges Pompidou, CCI, 1991). » – a “second nature” formed by the technical tissue, which to a large extent still has to be invented. As of the early 1990s, he warned of the risk that information overload would turn into “noise”: “We are living amidst a growing mass of ‘semiotic waste’ – in other words, messages, texts and used codes that we cannot get rid of. […] By their uncontrolled proliferation, the greatest variety of forms, colours and textures can result in the greyest of worlds.” 11 Ezio Manzini, Artifacts. Towards an ecology of the artificial environment [1990], trans. Adriana Pilia, (Paris: Center Georges Pompidou, CCI, 1991), 36-37. ), 36-37. ». Counter to the “attention deficit” supposedly engendered by the behavioural retroaction loops of the dominant digital “services” – that is, the economic exploitation of behaviours, affects and desires – researcher Yves Citton thus invites us to imagine the conditions of an “ecology of attention” 12 Yves Citton, For an ecology of attention, (Paris: Seuil, 2014). » going hand in hand with a reorientation of media policies. The philosopher of technologies Gilbert Simondon noted at the end of the 1950s, when reflecting on this loss of intelligibility, that “what is missing is the essential; the active centre of the technical operation remains veiled.” 13 Gilbert Simondon, Du mode d’existence des objets techniques [1958], (Paris: Aubier, 2012).». Technical advances have continually heightened this opacity and multiplied the “black boxes”. Who today really understands, for example, how blockchain protocols work, or the self-developing codes of deep learning ? In the video Rare Earthenware (exhibited at ZKM in Karlsruhe as part of the Reset Modernity! exhibition (2016, directed by sociologist and philosopher Bruno Latour), the design studio Unknown Field Divisions documented the trajectory of the rare metals needed to construct three telecommunications objects: a mobile phone, an ultra-thin laptop computer and a chip for an “intelligent” car battery. The quantity of toxic waste required to produce them was then assembled in the form of traditional Ming vases. Inseparable from the conception of many technological objects, “civil wars” cast a veil over the environmentally and humanly damaging nature of mining operations and make the supply process invisible. At stake in an ecology of digital techniques, from a psychic point of view, would be interrogating the claim of technologies to “solve” 14 Evgeny Morozov, To solve everything, click here. The aberration of technological solutionism [2013], trans. M-C. Braud, (Limoges: Fyp, 2014). » all the world’s problems. Not only do digital technologies not always save time, but they cause a proliferation of new problems. In order for the digital to benefit the masses and not just a handful of investors, we need to stand back from the idea that problems linked to technologies can simply be solved with more technology. We are indeed confronted with two gave ecological questions: environmental and human. There is, now, a third, at the other end of the chain. It concerns the user and is – in the broad sense — a disjunction between a “technical milieu” 15 André Leroi-Gourhan, Évolution et techniques. Milieu et techniques, (Paris: Albin Michel, 1973). » and the “actors” 16 Actor network theory (AnT) was developed in the 1990s by researchers Bruno Latour, Madeleine Akrich and Michel Callon. » inhabiting it. To treat persons as “users” comes down to introducing a dissymmetry between the conceivers of objects, of digital programmes, etc., and those who can only use them. Via ecology, then, we can prise open other dimensions than the reduction of technique to its technological and digital assignation: imagination, spirituality, memory, etc. In the French context, for example, it is interesting to study a genealogy that runs through the work of palaeontologist André Leroi-Gourhan, of the philosopher of technology Gilbert Simondon, and of philosopher Bernard Stiegler on digital mutations. For Leroi-Gourhan, the notion of the tool takes an almost biological turn. The tool is that whereby a living being accedes to existence by developing gesture and speech. The relation to the milieu is always a dynamic, and never something that is acquired for good and could be stabilised: human existence is a progressive and continuous detachment from its initial conditions. Simondon approaches technical objects as “lineages” that can be compared to organic configurations and reconfigurations. His later writings on imagination and invention in techniques take an almost spiritual direction. The subject is to be understood within a constant evolution. More precisely, the individual is conceived in relation to a “pre-individual” tending towards a “transindividual”. These reflections on “individuation” and technique have been extensively taken up by Bernard Stiegler, who places them in the context of a period when the combination of neoliberalism and marketing (via behavioural sciences) is massively heightening the risk of the subjection of human beings. For Stiegler, ecology is to be understood as living beings’ relation to their milieu, relations that are threatened by capitalism (industrial, financial, cognitive, etc.). Thus, in addition to necessary actions and reflections on the ecology of resources (the exhaustion of capacities of subsistence), rethinking the ecology of the spirit (exhaustion of the psyche and of desire) is emerging as an increasingly urgent task.
Date
March 2018
Type
ConférenceContexte
Conférence et performance autour de la nouvelle collection Esthétique des données (éditions B42), pensée à la fois pour les amateurs et les spécialistes de la culture numérique. Merci à Marie Lechner, Lola Ricordeau et Clémence Seurat.
Résumé
À l’occasion de cette soirée, j’ai rédigé et performé une une nouvelle notice (contenu complémentaire à l’essai Design et humanités numériques) intitulée « Binance.com / Représenter », mise en ligne sur le site Web de la collection Esthétique des données. Cette contribution interroge l’esthétique des crypto-actifs (crypto-monnaies, etc.) et de leurs représentations. Contexte Rencontre autour de la collection Esthétique des données (éditions B42), dont le premier livre a paru en novembre 2017. Cette collection s’adresse aux amateurs et aux spécialistes de la culture numérique. Dirigée par Nicolas Thély, elle a pour objectif de rendre communicables les expériences et les modes de pensée associés à la fréquentation des artefacts numériques (CD-R om, sites Internet, mondes virtuels, logiciels, bases de données, etc.) en mettant en lumière des textes rédigés ces vingt dernières années par des critiques et théoriciens de l’art et en publiant les recherches d’une nouvelle génération de chercheurs en humanités numériques. Table ronde et discussion en présence de Nicolas Thély, directeur de la collection Esthétique des données (éditions B42), Anthony Masure, auteur de Design et humanités numériques, Gilles Rouffineau, auteur de Éditions off-line (prochain livre à paraître dans la collection) et de Kévin Donnot et Elise Gay, qui ont pris en charge la création du site Web dédié à la collection. À l’occasion de cette table ronde, Anthony Masure et Gilles Rouffineau offriront une démonstration performée des enjeux théoriques développés au sein de leurs ouvrages respectifs. Anthony Masure présentera les notices d’une sélection choisie de logiciels et de services présentés dans son livre. Gilles Rouffineau ramènera à la vie des CD-R om des années 1990. Avec le partenariat de l’équipe PTAC. — Participants Anthony Masure est maître de conférences en design à l’université Toulouse Jean Jaurès. Il a cofondé les revues de recherche Réel-Virtuel et Back Office. Inscrites dans le champ du design, ses recherches portent sur les implications sociales et politiques des nouvelles technologies. Il est l’auteur de Design et humanités numériques (B42). Gilles Rouffineau enseigne en design graphique à l’Ecole Supérieure d’Art et de Design Grenoble-Valence. Il codirige l’unité de recherche « Il n’y a pas de savoir sans Transmission ». Ses recherches concernent depuis quelques années l’archéologie des éditions numériques. Son livre, Editions off-line, paraîtra aux éditions B42 en 2018. Nicolas Thély est Directeur de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme en Bretagne (MSHB) et professeur en arts, esthétique et humanités numériques à l’université Rennes 2 au sein de l’équipe Pratiques et Théories de l’art contemporain. Il dirige la collection Esthétique des données aux éditions B42. Kévin Donnot et Élise Gay sont designers graphiques au sein du studio E+K. Kévin Donnot est également enseignant spécialisé dans le numérique à l’ÉESAB Rennes et à l’Université Paris 8.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
January 2013
Type
PublicationContexte
Anthony Masure, « Makers : Fable labs ? », Strabic.fr, janvier 2013
Résumé
Après La longue traîne (2006) et Free ! Entrez dans l’économie du gratuit (2009), Chris Anderson revient nous narrer les tendances du futur dans Makers. La nouvelle révolution industrielle (2012). Si ces précédents ouvrages restaient cantonnés au domaine des écrans, celui-ci explore le vaste champ du numérique et des objets « autofabriqués ? ». L’ex-rédacteur en chef du magazine culte Wired est-il convaincant dans son nouveau rôle d’évangéliste des machines de fabrication automatisées ?
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
April 2019
Type
PublicationContexte
Actes du colloque de Cerisy Écologie de l’attention et archéologie des médias (juin 2016)
Résumé
La notification, cette forme de communication par fragments, interruptions et redondances s’est renforcée avec l’émergence des terminaux mobiles qui permettent d’accéder et de traiter des données en temps réel. Entre le manque investi par le numérique et la (supposée) saturation d’informations conduisant, pour certains chercheurs, à une crise de l’attention, comment les notifications numériques participent-elles d’une reconfiguration sociotechnique de l’expérience du manque ? Quelles sont les spécificités de ce milieu attentionnel ?
Personnes citées
Date
May 2021
Type
PublicationContexte
Contribution à l’ouvrage collectif Shaping the Digital Dissertation: Knowledge Production in the Arts and Humanities, dir. Virginia Kuhn et Anke Finger, éditions OpenBook.
Résumé
How do these publication practices of online PhD thesis, which are not yet widespread in the conduct of a thesis doctorate, modify the relationship between the direction and the writing of the thesis? How can they open up new research directions while taking into account current standards? What dissemination and communication opportunities do they provide? How do they change the way research is done?
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Résumé
Although the concept of “artificial intelligence” (AI) is an old one, its presence is constantly growing, whether in medias, pop culture, or everyday objects. In the 2010’s, the power of “self-learning” systems, those of deep learning, is related to unintelligible architectures (black boxes). These AIs progressively could replace tasks commonly assigned to designers. In this process, there is a risk that design becomes nothing more than an automated way of doing things and services, and that of formatting human experiences. How are these issues addressed by designers? What can design do “with” artificial intelligence?
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Date
October 2021
Type
ConférenceContexte
Conférence avec Guillaume Helleu, donnée au séminaire « Actualité de la recherche », HEAD – Genève + UNIGE.
Résumé
Cette communication explore les enjeux des technologies blockchain dans le champ de la création (art, design, jeu vidéo, etc.) à travers le développement, depuis 2015, des « Non Fungible Tokens » (NFT) – à savoir la production d’un certificat numérique infalsifiable et décentralisé attaché à une entité numérique ou tangible. Mis en lumière depuis le début de l’année 2021 par une multitude de ventes aux sommes record et par le développement de places de marché spécifiques, les NFT soulèvent des enjeux relatifs à la valeur, à la circulation et à l’exposition des productions artistiques et culturelles.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Date
February 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Conférence à la Gaîté Lyrique dans le cadre de la résidence NØ LAB (Dasha Ilina et Benjamin Gaulon), session « What the NFT », en présence de Raphaël de Courville et de Addie Wagenknecht.
Résumé
Flyer de l’évènement Paris, Gaîté Lyrique, NØ LAB, « What the NFT », 10 février 2022 Paris, Gaîté Lyrique, NØ LAB, « What the NFT », 10 février 2022 Paris, Gaîté Lyrique, NØ LAB, « What the NFT », 10 février 2022
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
March 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Conférence pédagogique donnée dans le cadre du cycle « Digilunch » à destination du personnel de la HEAD – Genève et de l’ECAL.
Résumé
Afin d’étudier les implications des technologies blockchain pour les métiers de la création, cette conférence aborde le cas des NFT, des certificats d’authenticité décentralisés et infalsifiables. Mis en lumière depuis début 2021 par une multitude de vente aux sommes record et par le développement de places de marché spécifiques, les NFT soulèvent des problèmes relatifs à la valeur, à la circulation et à l’exposition des objets numériques.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
April 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Intervention dans le podcast « 2031 - Blockchains », épisode 7, « NFT : comment ça fonctionne et quelle place vont-ils prendre ? », La Cantine et Stereolux, avril 2022.
Résumé
Du jeu vidéo à la mode, les NFT (certificats d’authenticité d’un objet virtuel) connaissent un franc succès… qui pourrait être freiné par les nombreux problèmes qu’ils soulèvent.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
June 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Intervention à la télévision RTS dans l’émission « Faut pas croire », séquence « Le métavers, paradis ou enfer virtuel ? » animée par Linn Lévy en compagnie de Florian Ducommun.
Résumé
Le « métavers », cette plateforme d’immersion tridimensionnelle connectant les réseaux sociaux, les jeux vidéo et les applications – est appelée à devenir l’économie du futur. Décryptage du concept sur le plateau de Faut pas croire avec Florian Ducommun, une émission animée par Linn Lévy.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
June 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Discussion avec Ana Andrijevic à l’occasion de l’évènement « At the Bar: Talks on Artists’ Rights » à Zürich.
Résumé
Photo de l’évènement We are pleased to invite you to our upcoming event « At the Bar: Talks on Artists’ Rights » on Saturday 11 June 2022 at 4 pm during the Zurich Art Weekend. Artists are at the core of the art world and yet often lack guidance on legal questions that can help structure their creative process. From managing relationships with dealers and gallerists, to questioning the originality of works in the digital age, but also navigating exhibitions, art professionals are faced with a variety of issues which could influence their artistic development in the long run. For the second time, the Association for Rights in the Arts is bringing together artists and legal practitioners in an intimate setting to talk about these issues. Program 4.00pm – 4.05pm: Welcome drink & Opening remarks 4.05pm – 4.30pm : Lawyer Irina Tarsis & Artist Franziska Furter will discuss “Artist-dealer relationships: contracts & other tips” 4.30pm – 4.55pm : PhD Candidate Ana Andrijevic & Professor Anthony Masure will discuss “The originality of photographs in the digital age” 4.55pm – 5.20pm : Lawyer Cornelia Mattig & Artist Damien Juillard will discuss “Navigating exhibitions as a young artist” 5.20pm – 5.35pm : Discussion & Closing remarks 5.35pm – 6pm : Open bar
Date
June 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Communication au colloque international « CinéDesign 3 : Family Matters! », dir. Saul Pandelakis et Irène Dunyach, Université Toulouse – Jean Jaurès
Résumé
Cette communication étudie les nouvelles formes de sociabilité permises par les technologies blockchain et, plus précisément, par les différentes notions rassemblées sous le slogan de « Web3 » : propriété, preuve de confiance, chiffrement, identité, valeur, décentralisation et consensus. Celles-ci permettent entres autres de modéliser des interactions sociales et des mécanismes de régulation, laissant entrevoir, peut-être, d’autres façons de faire famille voire de potentiels dépassements de ce concept.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
September 2022
Type
ConférenceContexte
Intervention avec Guillaume Helleu au Computer Art Congress (CAC.7) « Computer & Media Art at the Age of Metaverse and NFT », HEAD – Genève, HES-SO. Cette conférence se base sur un article de recherche publié dans la revue Multitudes en novembre 2021.
Résumé
Cette conférence explore les enjeux des technologies blockchain dans le champ de la création (art, design, jeu vidéo, etc.) à travers le développement, depuis 2015, des « Non Fungible Tokens » (NFT) – à savoir la production d’un certificat numérique infalsifiable et décentralisé attaché à une entité numérique ou tangible. Mis en lumière depuis le début de l’année 2021 par une multitude de ventes aux sommes record et par le développement de places de marché spécifiques, les NFT soulèvent des enjeux relatifs à la valeur, à la circulation et à l’exposition des productions artistiques et culturelles.
Notions
Personnes citées
Objets mentionnés
Médias
Date
September 2023
Type
ConférenceContexte
Communication avec Florie Souday (ENS Paris-Saclay) au colloque international « AI and Education for Democracy », UNESCO EVA Chair, Université Côte d’Azur, Nice.
Résumé
Available from 2021 for as many people as possible, machine learning has created several issues for schools (ie. teaching objectives, exams, etc.). At the same time, these generative technologies are questioning the foundations of democracy, challenging notions of veracity, privacy, ownership and shared values. With its twofold American and Chinese hegemony, AI has become an insidious cultural model for the rest of the world. It doesn’t lend itself well to the development of democracy – if we define this concept as a dynamic principle that “thwarts the normal distribution of power” (Jacques Rancière). What reconfigurations are needed to ensure that AI is not a threat but an opportunity for democracy? How can we redefine education to achieve this objective?
Notions
Objets mentionnés
Médias