<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hoax!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html</link>
	<description>This Blog Sits At the Intersection of Anthropology and Economics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 21:10:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd W.</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/comment-page-1#comment-3846</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd W.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:39:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=598#comment-3846</guid>
		<description>The Mini hoax site has indeed disappeared, but nothing can escape the gravitational power of Archive.org&#039;s &quot;Wayback Machine&quot;:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040401123415/http://www.r50rd.co.uk/research/internal/v2i/engin/
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Mini hoax site has indeed disappeared, but nothing can escape the gravitational power of Archive.org&#8217;s &#8220;Wayback Machine&#8221;:</p>
<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040401123415/http://www.r50rd.co.uk/research/internal/v2i/engin/" rel="nofollow">http://web.archive.org/web/20040401123415/http://www.r50rd.co.uk/research/internal/v2i/engin/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/comment-page-1#comment-3845</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Oct 2006 10:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=598#comment-3845</guid>
		<description>Grant --
Your 4 questions are very interesting to some of us in computer science at present.  Developing artificial languages for autonomous machines to communicate with one another, the whole notion of insincere utterances is deeply difficult.  How can computers, which are so far only very literal-minded, understand irony, parody, sarcasm, hoaxes, feints, tactical agreement, etc?  If they cannot perceive these features in a conversation, does that mean they will be at a disadvantage interacting with machines or people able to speak insincerely?
Before we can answer these questions for computers, it will certainly be useful to know how humans successfully perceive these features of conversation.  So, not for the first time, I think your research agenda is very important for people outside anthropology or marketing.   Perhaps you could persuade IBM, HP or one of the big European telcos (all doing advanced research into automated negotiation) to fund you.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Grant &#8211;</p>
<p>Your 4 questions are very interesting to some of us in computer science at present.  Developing artificial languages for autonomous machines to communicate with one another, the whole notion of insincere utterances is deeply difficult.  How can computers, which are so far only very literal-minded, understand irony, parody, sarcasm, hoaxes, feints, tactical agreement, etc?  If they cannot perceive these features in a conversation, does that mean they will be at a disadvantage interacting with machines or people able to speak insincerely?</p>
<p>Before we can answer these questions for computers, it will certainly be useful to know how humans successfully perceive these features of conversation.  So, not for the first time, I think your research agenda is very important for people outside anthropology or marketing.   Perhaps you could persuade IBM, HP or one of the big European telcos (all doing advanced research into automated negotiation) to fund you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sandra Argenius</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/comment-page-1#comment-3844</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandra Argenius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:51:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=598#comment-3844</guid>
		<description>If a hoax is &#039;temporary lie&#039; whose purpose is to invoke a reaction we can laugh at, and lies are smoke screens to temporarily, or permanently screen one&#039;s agenda from view, then the difference is in the words temporary and permanent. However, they also differ in their purpose. The one is used to evoke emotion; the other is used to manoeuvre socially.
It is not surprising that hoaxes appeal to people in our culture and there may be a link to virtual reality. Though the term has faded, that, which it depicts has an increasing role in our lives. As virtual reality gives us a ‘rush’ experienced when not bound to the limitations of one’s own race, gender, economic stand, physic etc, so gives the Hoax a rush  by way of invoking real emotions through illusion. Is this not just an advanced form of theatre.  What lies behind the need for this rush or the niche in our present culture which beds for its grasp on us is probably a weave of many factors.  Even the increasing tolerance of violence in society can be interpreted as an increased desire for the ‘emotional rush’. The popularity of special effects in the film industry has taught us how to go about this. It has been popular this year in Stockholm for young men to meet somewhere in town, mark the clock and then set off with their mobile phone cameras to club down, rape and antagonize other citizens whilst filming. After the conquests, they meet and agree on a winner. It is just for fun the suburban lads say when asked.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If a hoax is &#8216;temporary lie&#8217; whose purpose is to invoke a reaction we can laugh at, and lies are smoke screens to temporarily, or permanently screen one&#8217;s agenda from view, then the difference is in the words temporary and permanent. However, they also differ in their purpose. The one is used to evoke emotion; the other is used to manoeuvre socially.</p>
<p>It is not surprising that hoaxes appeal to people in our culture and there may be a link to virtual reality. Though the term has faded, that, which it depicts has an increasing role in our lives. As virtual reality gives us a ‘rush’ experienced when not bound to the limitations of one’s own race, gender, economic stand, physic etc, so gives the Hoax a rush  by way of invoking real emotions through illusion. Is this not just an advanced form of theatre.  What lies behind the need for this rush or the niche in our present culture which beds for its grasp on us is probably a weave of many factors.  Even the increasing tolerance of violence in society can be interpreted as an increased desire for the ‘emotional rush’. The popularity of special effects in the film industry has taught us how to go about this. It has been popular this year in Stockholm for young men to meet somewhere in town, mark the clock and then set off with their mobile phone cameras to club down, rape and antagonize other citizens whilst filming. After the conquests, they meet and agree on a winner. It is just for fun the suburban lads say when asked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dilys</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/comment-page-1#comment-3843</link>
		<dc:creator>dilys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2006 04:10:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=598#comment-3843</guid>
		<description>The Al Durah trials in France -- libel charges for defendants pointing out media &quot;fauxtography&quot; -- summary at http://tinyurl.com/ykej46 -- are the other side of &quot;what is/isn&#039;t a hoax?&quot; Where/in what context, according to the social contract, may hoaxes be generated? Which hoaxes may not be pierced? What is the risk in calling something a hoax which may not be, or no more than is customary? Which is more devastating to personal prestige, not to recognize a hoax, or to openly believe something actual to be a hoax?
Playfulness-and-lies is an interesting terrain.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Al Durah trials in France &#8212; libel charges for defendants pointing out media &#8220;fauxtography&#8221; &#8212; summary at <a href="http://tinyurl.com/ykej46" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/ykej46</a> &#8212; are the other side of &#8220;what is/isn&#8217;t a hoax?&#8221; Where/in what context, according to the social contract, may hoaxes be generated? Which hoaxes may not be pierced? What is the risk in calling something a hoax which may not be, or no more than is customary? Which is more devastating to personal prestige, not to recognize a hoax, or to openly believe something actual to be a hoax?</p>
<p>Playfulness-and-lies is an interesting terrain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChrisM</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/comment-page-1#comment-3842</link>
		<dc:creator>ChrisM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2006 03:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=598#comment-3842</guid>
		<description>Re. the Borat film (Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan), BBC World have just broadcast a news report on the film&#039;s premiere in London. Check out http://www.chrismerriman.com/index.php/archives/209 for a video clip of it...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re. the Borat film (Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan), BBC World have just broadcast a news report on the film&#8217;s premiere in London. Check out <a href="http://www.chrismerriman.com/index.php/archives/209" rel="nofollow">http://www.chrismerriman.com/index.php/archives/209</a> for a video clip of it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Richardson</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/10/hoax.html/comment-page-1#comment-3841</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Richardson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2006 01:13:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=598#comment-3841</guid>
		<description>Another great mini fake: http://www.counterfeitmini.com/
Got to check out their &quot;public service announcement&quot;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another great mini fake: <a href="http://www.counterfeitmini.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.counterfeitmini.com/</a><br />
Got to check out their &#8220;public service announcement&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

