[PD] pd~conf 2.0
hans at eds.org
Sun May 7 15:59:11 CEST 2006
On May 7, 2006, at 9:53 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Mar 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>> On Mar 24, 2006, at 10:24 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>>> I don't think he was serious about that =) Ottawa, ON is too
>>> "small" for
>>> such a thing, and I'm including Gatineau, QC, across the bridge.
>>> I mean
>>> "small" as in not enough Pd users. Ottawa and Gatineau together
>>> might be
>>> one million people, but if you try to find Pd users, you only
>>> find them at
>>> Ottawa U or Artengine.
>> Graz is 350,000, and it worked there. I don't think that would be
>> such an
>> issue. Plus there are a lot of people who live near enough Ottawa.
> Reread what I said, I said "small" as in not enough Pd users. If I
> can't say "Ottawa is too small" let me say "Ottawa does not have
> enough Pd
> BTW, Graz is 240,000 people, according to Wikipedia.
> But those figures mean little. I have a copy of "aktuelle Kunst in
> (a paper publication associated to http://www.graz03.at/). It makes
> look very big, possibly as big as Montréal, given the number of
> entries in
> that booklet.
>>> I think Montréal is still not ready for such an event, if it has
>>> to be a
>>> reasonable sequel to PdConvention04.
>> Why not.
> Actually, I know people who want to try for 2007 (or who say they
> want to
> try...). This is a topic for the 20th PureData Montréal Users Group
> meeting, which will be on May 14, just after the Holzer&Kolster PMPD
> Workshop in Montréal (they are doing the same workshop in Ottawa this
To do PdConf07, the wheels need to start rolling now. I don't want
to step on any toes, that's why I started this thread on the list,
but some basic wheels have started in motion for doing Pd~conf in NYC
for Summer 07. So if there is a crew ready to do it in Montreal for
07, then we should work this out now.
>>> Right now I'd like to hear _why_ another Pd Convention should
>>> Well, I mean, apart from being _damn_ _fun_...
>> To me, that's not really a question that needs to be asked, but
>> I'll answer
>> it. So much can get accomplished in 10 minutes of face-to-face
>> that would take days on the list.
> Why is the mailing-list so inefficient? What can be done to improve
> mailing-list? Are there affective issues? If so, we might need a
> Hug Transfer Protocol.
> The reason why I ask why is so that we can answer the question of
> what the
> programme should look like. Let's not assume that the programme has to
> have the same format as the original. But to know what to put in the
> programme we should know our goals for the conference (in terms of
> fostering further development of the community and such), and to
> know our
> goals we need to know why we're making a second conference... well,
> from having a damn lot of fun, and the desire to outshine Graz or
> something... ;-)
>> Pd~conf 1 covered such a broad range, it took me in many directions I
>> would never have gone had I not attended.
> Could you please explain that experience? What were your new
The first thing that comes to mind is thinking about how to best
organize the labor of many developers. That planted the seeds for
namespaces and Pd-extended. Now, I don't think that we should try to
create some simple language like Max/MSP, but instead should make Pd
an framework that makes it easy to organize the work of many people.
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of
exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an
idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps
it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into
the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess
himself of it."
More information about the Pd-list