![The P2P ‘Tipping Point’ ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Similar a The Politics of Peer Production
Similar a The Politics of Peer Production (20)
Último
Último (8)
The Politics of Peer Production
- 1. Peer to Peer As a new mode of production, governance, and property
- 6. Levy: from the molar to the molecular Archaic Molar Molecular Life Natural Selection (natural time) Artificial Selection (generational time) Genetic splicing (real-time) Matter Mechanical (outside) Thermo- Dynamic (Warming) Nanotech (cold) Information Somatic (co-presence) Mediatic (mass) Digital Human Groups Organic Organiza-tional Self-organized
- 7. Usage of P2P depends on consciousness
- 8. P2P as technological infrastructure
- 15. “… .People would experience others as equals in the sense of their being both superior and inferior to themselves in varying skills and areas of endeavor (intellectually, emotionally, artistically, mechanically, interpersonally, and so forth), but with none of those skills being absolutely higher or better than others…” Jorge Ferrer The Revolution of Equipotentiality
- 21. The Evolution of Hierarchy (1) by John Heron Degrees of Moral Insight Relationship between hierarchy, cooperation, autonomy Premodern no rights of political participation Hierarchy defines, controls and constrains co-operation and autonomy Early Modern political participation through representation Hierarchy empowers a measure of co-operation and autonomy in the political sphere only Late Modern political representation with varying degrees of wider participation Hierarchy empowers a measure of co-operation and autonomy in the political sphere and in varying degrees in other spheres P2P Era equipotential rights of participation of everyone in every field The sole role of hierarchy is in its spontaneous emergence in the initiation and continuous flowering of autonomy-in-co-operation in all spheres of human endeavor
- 23. Evolution of Hierarchy (2): Power Period Machine Dates Diagram Manager Consciousness (Agency of) Sovereign Society (make die, Let live) Mechanical 1757 Centralization Hierarchy Monarchy Disciplinary Society (let die, make live) Thermodyna -mics 1844 (telegraph) Decentralization Bureaucracy Separation/ balance of powers Control Society Cybernetics (computers) 1954 Distribution Protocol Organized civil society (NGO) Collective Intelligence Society Internet/Web 1994 P2P Transparency Peer Circles
- 24. Evolution of Cooperation “it’s no longer about incentives, but about removing impediments” Time frame Typology => Cooperation & Motivation Formats Game Typology Quality of Cooperation Pre-modern (feudal, imperial) Adversarial Extrinsic negative Zero Sum: Win-Lose “ Power Game ” Low, 1+1<2 Modern (market, industrial) Neutral Extrinsic positive Zero Sum: Win-win: Draw “ Money Game ” Average, 1+1=2 P2P era Synergistic Intrinsic positive The 4 wins “ Wisdom Game ” High, 1+1>2
- 25. P2P as a new way of working A few people do all the work Many people do a little of the work You have to pay all of them You don’t have to pay most of them It’s hard to get involved It’s easy to get involved Support from people you know Support from a legion of strangers
- 31. Physical vs. Information Commons Traditional Commons Information Commons Type of Resource Rival Non-rival & Anti-rival Scope Local Non-local Actors Territorial Groups Global Affinity Groups Governance Communities Cyber Collectives
- 34. Why P2P will grow For Profit For Benefit Immaterial production Material production
- 36. Striking a Critical Balance between Giving It Away and Making Money… Portfolio Free Open Paid Closed No Source Code Included No Charge for Software No Source Code Included Charge for Software Includes Source Code Charge for Software Source Code Included No Charge for Software Gratis $$$ Assets Practices … And Utilizing a Sound Business Model to Stay on Track Differentiated Value Common Value
- 45. User vs. corporate typology Type of Users Type of Corporation Prosumer Mode Crowdsourcing Swarming Mode Platform Enablers Community Mode Commons-dependent
- 72. As a new mode of production, governance, and property P2P = a total social fact
- 73. THANK YOU Contact Information Wiki : www.p2pfoundation.net Blog : blog.p2pfoundation.com Email : michelsub2004@gmail.com
Notas del editor
- Presentation by Michel Bauwens, P2P Foundation, at http://www.p2pfoundation.net/index.php/Main_Page Graphical and other assistance by James Burke, http://lifesized.blogspot.com/ The P2P Foundation Blog is at http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/ P2P News is at http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p The graph represents the P2P Conceptual Universe. In the green circles, we have the deep underlying causes, the deep trends towards forms of participative knowing, from a stress on atomistic individualism to relationality, the new emergence of sharing practices etc… The orange box summarized contemporary social practices which result from the underlying trends. Finally, the beige circles are the concrete human projects to which it gives rise.
- Source: The Edelman reports, see http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=50 Last quote from Tara Hunt, based on figures by Forrester Research, at http://www.horsepigcow.com/2007/09/13/how-to-make-a-gabillion-dollars-with-community-marketingor-something-to-that-effect/
- Alexander Galloway in his book Protocol makes an important and clear distinction between centralized networks (with one central hub where everything must pass and be authorized, as in the old telephone switching systems), decentralized systems, with more than one center, but these subcenters still being authorative (such as the airport system in the U.S. centered around hubs where planes must pass through), from distributed systems, where hubs may exist, but are not obligatory (such as the internet). In distributed networks, participants may freely link with each other, they are fully autonomous agents. Hence the importance to clearly distinguish between our usage of the concepts 'decentralized' vs. 'distributed'. Peer to peer is specifically the relational dynamic that arises in distributed networks. So: what is peer to peer? Here’s a first tentative definition: It is a specific form of relational dynamic, is based on the assumed equipotency of its participants , organized through the free cooperation of equals in view of the performance of a common task, for the creation of a common good, with forms of decision-making and autonomy that are widely distributed throughout the network. Source: Protocol. How Control Exists after Decentralization. Alexander Galloway. MIT Press, 2004
- Hierarchy only works when the complexity of the collective does not surpass the complexity of the individual at the top of the hierarchy. When the complexity of the collective surpasses that level, lateral relations increasinly overtake the hierarchical model. Source: http://necsi.org/projects/yaneer/Civilization.html
- This slide indicates how different superficially similar looking network can be, once we integrate the full intersubjectivity of the relations, as network theory fails to do. “ When we look at the 9 vMemes as complex systems, in terms of their connectivity approaches, then we see a number of different styles. At beige the people are isolated from each other, they behave independently as do plants in the wild, here there are no social benefits to speak of, meetings between the individuals are rare and likely to be competitive. At purple the leaders cooperate, bringing a consensus rule to the local group and controlling by loyalty, whilst the tribe loosely associate with each other, giving a ’symbiosis’ approach for mutual benefit. Yet all groups remain disconnected and local. At red we see the first true hierarchy, with a single leader, aided by underlings, ruling by physical force. In this local society power flows down and resources flow up, the rich take from the poor. Justice here is arbitrary, based upon the whim of the leader, it is a style rich in unpredictability. Many societies compete for power. Once we get to blue the emphasis changes to a bureaucracy, an inflexible hierarchy based upon the psychological orange local two-way transactions between participants comes to the fore, and we gain the benefits of exchange, with a freedom to decide whether or not to accept or make any offer. This is potentially a fully connected and somewhat chaotic matrix with global aspirations. Within the green forces of belief and the strong use of rules or laws to structure justice and order at both local and global levels. At worldview the focus shifts to more intangible ideas and small isolated consensus groups ‘doing their own thing’ as it were, but each competing to try to impose their single value globally upon all. It is a highly modular approach. A change now occurs as yellow arrives, and the first stage of 2nd tier ‘vision logic’ is seen. These people act as facilitators (shown in white), acting locally to bind together the six 1st tier vMemes and to encourage the use of the most appropriate vMeme. At turquoise networks of such facilitators coordinate actions globally, acting to help make visible and solve the world’s problems. Finally at coral enlightened sages appear who act to instruct those lower on the spiral in ways to progress along their spiritual path to 2nd tier understanding and tolerance .” Source: http://www.calresco.org/wp/spiral.htm According to Ken Wilber’s synthesis of memetic population figures: 0.1 and 2% of the world and US populations are in the ‘turquoise’ (constructive-aware, holistic) 1 and 4.9% are yellow (systemic, autonomous) 10 and “from 11.3 to 26%’ are green (communautarian-individualist) 30 and ‘from 48 to 66%) are orange (entrepreneurial-individualist) 40 and ‘from 11 to 26%) are blue (conformist-authoritarian) 20 and 4.3 are red (exploitative-impulsive) Source: http://www.slideshare.net/evansridge/integral-institute-community-presentation, slide 17
- Mememap from Tim O’Reilly, which totally focuses on the technological expressions of the P2P paradigm, but especially the software application layer.
- Source: http://novaspivack.typepad.com/RadarNetworksTowardsAWebOS.jpg
- Web 2.0. Documentary: Is Web 2.0. a bubble? URL = http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/08/08/web-20-the-24-minute-documentary/
- The Wisdom of Crowds: James Surowiecky: &quot;“There are four key qualities that make a crowd smart. It needs to be diverse, so that people are bringing different pieces of information to the table. 2) It needs to be decentralized, so that no one at the top is dictating the crowd’s answer. 3) It needs a way of summarizing people’s opinions into one collective verdict. 4) And the people in the crowd need to be independent, so that they pay attention mostly to their own information, and not worrying about what everyone around them thinks.” Book: The Wisdom of Crowds. Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations. James Surowiecki. Doubleday, 2004
- Equipotentiality : peer production processes are characterized by the adoption of equipotentiality as an organizing principle. This means that everyone can potentially cooperate in a project, that no authority can pre-judge the ability to cooperate, but that the quality of cooperation is then judged by the community of peers , i.e. through Communal Validation . In equipotential projects, participants self-select themselves to the module to which they feel able to contribute . Anti-credentialism : Modern knowledge exchange is based on a priori institutionalized filtering, i.e. on 'credentials', such as in the process of Peer Review . Here's a quote by Jimmy Wales, founder of the Wikipedia project: “ And if a person‘s really smart and they‘re doing fantastic work I don‘t care if they‘re a high school kid or a Harvard professor, it‘s the work that matters. And you can‘t coast on your credentials on Wikipedia. You have to – you have to enter the marketplace of ideas and engage with people .? ( http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
- Notes on equipotentiality, anti-credentialism, self-selection: see next slides Panoptism is how knowledge is distributed in hierarchical organisations. Only the top of the pyramid has a full view of what is going on in the organisation. Peer groups are characterized by holoptism , i.e. the ability for any member to have horizontal knowledge of what the others are doing, but also the vertical knowledge related to the aims of the project. Participation Capture is in function of transparency: “Sousveillance is the conscious capture of processes from below, by individual participants; surveillance is from the top down, while participation capture is inscribed in the very protocols of cooperation and is therefore an automatic ‘inscription’ of what we are doing.”
- Notes on equipotentiality, anti-credentialism, self-selection: see next slides Panoptism is how knowledge is distributed in hierarchical organisations. Only the top of the pyramid has a full view of what is going on in the organisation. Peer groups are characterized by holoptism , i.e. the ability for any member to have horizontal knowledge of what the others are doing, but also the vertical knowledge related to the aims of the project. Participation Capture is in function of transparency: “Sousveillance is the conscious capture of processes from below, by individual participants; surveillance is from the top down, while participation capture is inscribed in the very protocols of cooperation and is therefore an automatic ‘inscription’ of what we are doing.”
- (http://www.newcommblogzine.com/?p=509)
- Book. Yochai Benkler. The Wealth of Networks
- P2P are those processes that are geared: - to produce use value through the free cooperation of producers who have access to distributed capital: this is the P2P production mode, a 'third mode of production', different from for-profit or public production by state-owned enterprises. It's product is not exchange value for a market, but use value for a community of users. - whose processes and decision-making are governed by the community of producers themselves, and not by market allocation or corporate hierarchy: this is the P2P governance mode, or 'third mode of governance‘ - that make this use value freely accessible on a universal basis, through new common property regimes: this is its distribution or 'property mode': a 'third mode of ownership', different from private property or public (state) property. Alex Bruns says peer production is produsage, and peer governance is adhocracy
- Slide inspired/modified from Francois Rey. First three rows, from Alexander Galloway’s Protocol. Row four and five from Francois Rey. Some adaptations by Michel Bauwens. Key change between row four and five is a change in human consciousness, which is now aware of protocollary power and demands transparency.
- Inspired by Joe Edelman’s insights on the adventure economy. URL = http://www.opencouchsurfing.org/wiki/The_Future_of_Work%2C_Fun%2C_and_Being_Social
- From http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=FVDVO2BWIVVLWQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=197002953&pgno=2&queryText=
- Peter Barnes’ strategy to rebuild a commons-based society “ So here’s what I propose: • Our organizing principle for the next 20 or 30 years should be: reinvent and rebuild the commons. This needn’t be done all at once; it can be done brick by brick. • We design institutions to manage commons at local, regional, national and global levels, and road-test these institutions wherever possible. • We challenge the divine right of capital in the media, the universities and the courts. And we promote every citizen’s right to an equal share of some common wealth. We won’t win at first, but we keep chipping away. • We nourish institutional seeds. For example, land trusts, watershed councils, air quality districts and similar entities already abound. What they lack, largely, are property rights and steady revenue streams. • We make polluters pay into trusts. After all, they’re trespassing on our common inheritance. • We build alliances with religious groups and reframe the debate about morality. Many religions believe that nature is a gift of God that humans must respect and preserve. Many are also concerned about the effects of commercialism and materialism on children and families” Source: http://onthecommons.org/node/698 )
- Participation quote Michael Feldstein from http://blog.worldcampus.psu.edu/index.php/2007/10/31/coases-university/
- In the first phase of the information economy, its still ‘industrial’ phase, high capital outlays were required, but reproduction costs were almost zero. High capital requirements needed to be compensated by a large consumer base (hence a mass media model), and the marginal reproduction costs were neutralized by high levels of IP protection, which created monopoly rents; In the second ‘networked’ phase of the information economy, the initial requirements of capital are also distributed, and the audience fragmented; so both the ‘industrial’ mass media model; and the copyright protection of distribution, are called into question as unnessary and counterproductive constraints. Immaterial goods are not just non-rival goods, but even anti-rival goods.
- From Steve Bosserman, http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/steve_bosserman/2008/02/09/giving_it_away_making_money.htm
- Source: Erik von Hippel, The Democratization of Innovation
- Source: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_6/west/index.html
- Source of 2 citations:Robert Cringely, at http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20061215_001334.html
- Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lynetter/157822483/
- Source: Franz Nahrada, http://www.globalvillages.info/wiki.cgi?GlobalVillages/FranzNahrada/Workspace/RomeSpeech
- Business Week Firefox slideshow, at http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/08/mozilla/index_01.htm?
- Business Week Firefox slideshow, at http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/08/mozilla/index_01.htm?
- Jeff Howe in Wired, at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html
- Source: http://www.samiviitamaki.com/2007/02/16/the-flirt-model-of-crowdsourcing-collective-customer-collaboration/
- http://www.samiviitamaki.com/2007/02/16/the-flirt-model-of-crowdsourcing-collective-customer-collaboration/
- IBM on Open Source –based innovation “ Open source software and standards developed among universities, government and the IT industry form the basis for genuine collaborative innovation. This collaboration will lead to greater commercialization throughout the IT industry. Because of that, it is imperative that these principles guide our efforts to collectively improve current intellectual property practices.” John E. Kelly III, Senior Vice President, Technology & Intellectual Property at IBM, AT http://onthecommons.org/node/774
- Source: http://diy.video24-7.org/2007/03/23/diy-media-seminar-aram-sinnreich-on-configurable-culture/
- View the 10-minute documentary, Copyright Criminals at http://www.p2pfoundation.net/index.php/Copyright_Criminals
- Presentation by Michel Bauwens, P2P Foundation, at http://www.p2pfoundation.net/index.php/Main_Page Graphical and other assistance by James Burke, http://lifesized.blogspot.com/ The P2P Foundation Blog is at http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/ P2P News is at http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p The graph represents the P2P Conceptual Universe. In the green circles, we have the deep underlying causes, the deep trends towards forms of participative knowing, from a stress on atomistic individualism to relationality, the new emergence of sharing practices etc… The orange box summarized contemporary social practices which result from the underlying trends. Finally, the beige circles are the concrete human projects to which it gives rise.