/s

notated as

☞ “Information wants to be free”

  • 27 Posts
  • 922 Comments
Joined 2 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年6月27日

help-circle








  • Dwellings are raised on stilts that sometimes extend as high as 3 metres (9.8 ft) off the ground. In this way, annual floods do not affect the main room in the houses of rice farmers, whereas rural farmers are able to use the ground level area beneath the house for working and to provide shelter for livestock. One or two wooden ladders, ramps or staircases provide access to the upper floor. The simplest houses consist of only one room on the upper floor, partitioned off to provide a storage place for rice, a bedroom for the parents, and a further space for unmarried daughters.

    The upper floor generally consists of one large room. The main part of this room, the area where visitors are received, is defined by four central pillars; in this space there will be a figure of Buddha, a television, and a battery-operated electric light in the centre attached to the pillars. The parents’ sleeping space is situated either to the left or the right of the central entrance; textiles are often hung to separate this area from the rest of the room. To the back of the upper floor, on the left, is a space for the girls, whilst the boys have a space reserved for them on the right. This arrangement may vary from one family to another, but children are always separated by gender and placed at the back of the house. Other variations in position relative to the main central area are possible, but this room, with a figure of Buddha, television and battery-operated light, always remains the most important area.

    Despite indoor and outdoor temperatures of 36 °C (97 °F) and up to 80% relative humidity the old rural Khmer houses are very comfortable, both at ground level and on the upper floor. In spite of the absence of electric or mechanical air conditioning, a draught-free environment appears to be attained simply by means of natural ventilation

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Khmer_house









  • Social media erupted with bewildered reactions from attendees. Some praised the band for forcing a conversation about surveillance that most people avoid, while others expressed discomfort with the unexpected data capture.

    Unlike typical concert technology that enhances your experience, this facial recognition system explicitly confronted attendees with the reality of data capture. The band made visible what usually happens invisibly—your face being recorded, analyzed, and potentially stored by systems you never explicitly agreed to interact with.

    The audience split predictably along ideological lines. Privacy advocates called it a boundary violation disguised as art. Others viewed it as necessary shock therapy for our sleepwalking acceptance of facial recognition in everyday spaces. Both reactions prove the intervention achieved its disruptive goal.

    Your relationship with facial recognition technology just got more complicated. Every venue, every event, every public space potentially captures your likeness. Massive Attack simply made the invisible visible—and deeply uncomfortable. The question now isn’t whether this was art or privacy violation, but whether you’re ready to confront how normalized surveillance has become in your daily life.