I found many of the works in this chapter very interesting and ground breaking for their time, but I found it a little bit difficult to find "art" in what I would consider some of which just being telecommunications, or computer science advances. The fact that there is a point, statement, or concept behind the work, as well as its location is what contributes to it being "art". One such example is the "Telegarden" by Ken Goldberg and Joseph Santarromana. (pg. 155). The work allows for users to remotely control an articulating robotical arm through the internet from the Ars Electronica Center in Linz, Austria. The robotic arm would care for a small garden of plants by planting seeds, watering, and monitoring them. I found the work to be incredibly interesting in terms of technology and the ability to remotely care for and grow plants in another location. However, I tended to see this project, like many others in the chapter like technological advances on the roles of computers, and the internet. However, because of its social networking/ interactive component, and it's placement it is considered also a work of "art". I feel that the book best says this " Telegarden explicitly emphasized the aspect of community by inviting people around the world to collectively cultivate a small ecosystem. Survival of the ecology was dependent on a remote social network. " It is the exploration of social networking, technology, and nature which makes this work an 'artwork".I think many of the works in this book will all fall into this category of being what I consider mostly to be technological advances, with a smaller component of art to them, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It is only through the advancement of technology the the realm of digital art even exists, and through its current rapid growth digital art is growing and changing at the same speed of technology.