<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You are right Michel; we don't share the same
framework... I should have been more clear... I am working in, and
interested in agency theory in relation to, the visual arts... which is not a
p2p environment, nor virtual particularly at all, but because my milieu is
creative, and driven largely by volunteerism, I feel the
questions around distribution of creativity are similar...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>however, if I've strayed too far off-list, pls
let me know and we can discontinue this thread</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Part of the reason I think there is common cause
here is that I share your conviction that virtual p2p is affecting physical
processes; we see it all around us... there is increasing integration
of virtual apparatus into physical processes and with that integration art
is produced more quickly, becomes known to more people more quickly, and
changes faster. And there is also a change in "the
weather"... the 'zeit geist' - ways of thinking and
attitudes today favour mobility, portability, transience, fluidity,
immediacy, responsiveness, reflexiveness, reactivity, engagement.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>With respect to your ideas about efficiency, there
is also common ground. In the visual arts, we certainly find abundance,
sometimes more imagined than actual, but still, cultural production is a
kind of surplus productivity -- and it is also driven by "passion
capital" (a great term btw).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>For me the key para. of your post is,
interestingly, the caveat, bracketed:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>> (But it comes at a price. While it is collectively sustainable (as
long as the passion capital </DIV>
<DIV>> of those who leave the project can be replaced by newcomers), it is
not individually </DIV>
<DIV>> sustainable. This key problem requires social institutional
solutons).</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Exactly so for the vast majority of artists, even the most
successful, who drift in and out of studio-based production while
"making a living" from teaching, commercial art or other forms of employment,
and/or are subsidized by family members. The art world is constantly fed by
younger artists, to the point that we have practically created a cultish status
here in Canada around what is called the "emerging" artist; no one asking what
exactly they emerge "as" or "into" afterwards.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I too suspect that the solution is
institutional and social and that is, for me, the reason for
the agency enquiry.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>For example, we do find some institutional relief to this
"unsustainability" here in Canada where we have a fairly well-developed
(though always inadequate) system of multi-level state funding for the
arts. The network of institutions that provide support includes, state arts
funding agencies that provide personal grants to artists and to artist-run
alternative spaces, public galleries, public museums, public art fairs and even
some business-type subsidies to private galleries. All these institutions
have social aspects; they act in agent-like ways, or, if you will, act sometimes
more like principals, engaging artists like agents to represent their
institutional programs.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>With respect to your last para. aren't
questions of leadership and heirarchies moot if the first problem, of basic
sustainability can't be answered? Otherwise, you have communities
that develop flatter, more inclusive, political processes but which finally
can't serve the very people who are creating them because those people have
to move on.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If political effectiveness is to be realized as a
result of p2p networks, don't they have to become financially
rewarding?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Finally, I don't know whether to bring it up here,
now, but I do have one more nagging question, terrible to leave it to the
end like this, and perhaps stray even futher afield, but...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Lately I'm feeling like there is another dark
side to "passion capital." Whether in YouTube or Second Life or
just filesharing, one creates at the same time that one consumes. I
write here because it entertains me to do so as much as I feel I am also being
productive. So I have misgivings, that something about p2p is
equivalent to hobbies like scrapbooking or model railroading or collecting
Barbis? We don't consider those to be particuarly creative, nor do we think of
them politically despite the fact that they all have rather large user groups
who develop consensus about standards and likely share many of the same values.
Yet, we tend to accept these more simply as kinds of surplus activity
pursued without concern for compensation by people who can afford the time and
the materials.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=michelsub2004@gmail.com href="mailto:michelsub2004@gmail.com">Michel
Bauwens</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=idc@mailman.thing.net
href="mailto:idc@mailman.thing.net">idc@mailman.thing.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, May 07, 2007 9:41 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [iDC] Agency (was Re: THE
ANTI WEB 2.0 MANIFESTO)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Hi Robert,<BR><BR>We may not share the same framework of
reference, so I'll be just rambling on.<BR><BR>(first, in case I haven't
mentioned it before, for a rapid overview of the p2p meme, there is now a
4-minute videa at <BR><A
href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/what-is-peer-to-peer-4-min-version-of-michel-bauwens-video-interview-featuring-cc-licensed-music/2007/05/04 ">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/what-is-peer-to-peer-4-min-version-of-michel-bauwens-video-interview-featuring-cc-licensed-music/2007/05/04
</A>)<BR><BR><BR>I will start with some arguments as why agency is indeed so
efficient in the p2p model, and conclude with a short paragraph as to why the
principal-agent logic does in fact not apply in distributed models. <BR><BR>I
am of the opinion that, in certain circumstances, which have to to with either
an abundance of resources (true in the immaterial sphere), or a distribution
of resources (i.e. slicing it up in so many small pieces that the supply
becomes a matter of sovereign individual choices which can create a semblance
of abundance, i.e. an infinity of choices even in a finite environment) - thus
when these conditions are met, that the economic and political productivity is
essentially higher, and almost inevitable creates asymmetric competition that
will make the distributed network stronger than its centralized or
decentralized rivals. <BR><BR>In terms of cooperation, p2p's synergestic
cooperation model (1+1>2) seems stronger than either neutral (the tit for
tat exchange of capitalism) or adversarial (feudal and tributary
models)<BR><BR>In terms of game theory the four wins of p2p cooperation (win
for the individuals involved, for the community, and for the world at large)
will trump the individual-wins-only of capitalism, and the win-lose model of
feudalism. <BR><BR>In terms of motivation, the peer production model simply
eliminates the less efficient motivations, i.e. the extrinsic negative of
adversarial models based on fear, and the intrinsic positive remunerations of
the for-profit model. Unpaid passionale production only caters for the
intrinsic positive motivation, which has been shown to be the most productive.
<BR><BR>(But it comes at a price. While it is collectively sustainable (as
long as the passion capital of those who leave the project can be replaced by
newcomers), it is not individually sustainable. This key problem requires
social institutional solutons). <BR><BR>I'm not sure what you mean by
representation, but peer production is essentially non-representational, and
can only be such because we can now globally coordinate micro-teams that stay
under the Dunbar number limitation of hierarchical necessity. <BR><BR>Peer
production is economically more productive for the above reasons, and is
politically more productive because of this intrinsically higher
participation, while it is more productive in terms of distribution of the
wealth creation, through its commons-oriented licenses. <BR><BR>I used to
think that the model of peer production would essentially emerge in the
immaterial sphere, and in those cases where the design phase could be split
from the capital-intensive physical production sphere. Von Hippel's work is
very convincing in showing how widespread the model of built-only capitalism
already is. <BR><BR>However, as I become more familiar with the advances in
Rapid Manucturing (see <A
href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Rapid_Manufacturing">http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Rapid_Manufacturing</A>)
and Desktop Manufacturing (see <BR><A
href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Desktop_Manufacturing">http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Desktop_Manufacturing</A>),
I'm becoming increasingly convinced of the strong trend towards the
distribution of physical capital. <BR><BR>If we couple this with the trend
towards the direct social production of money (i.e. the distribution of
financial capital, see <A
href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Exchange_Infrastructure_Projects">http://www.p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Exchange_Infrastructure_Projects
</A>) and the distribution of energy (<A
href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Energy_Grid">http://www.p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Energy_Grid</A>);
and how the two latter trends are interrelated (see <A
href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/combining-distributed-energy-with-distributed-money/2007/05/06">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/combining-distributed-energy-with-distributed-money/2007/05/06</A>),
then I believe we have very strong grounds to see a strong expansion of
p2p-based modalities in the physical sphere. See also Kevin Carson's book
manuscript about trends in decentralized production technology ( <A
href="http://mutualist.blogspot.com/">http://mutualist.blogspot.com/</A>)<BR><BR>I'm
not suggesting that all these trends automatically lead to an egalitarian
society, but I'm suggesting that these trends are very favourable to all those
working on counter-institutions and new types of social relationships, and
unprecedentally so. <BR><BR>How is this all evolving in terms of the
principal-agent problem, especially when there is no principal and agent
involved? (and indeed no asymmetric information 'in principle', though it may
occur 'in practice' because of dysfunctions). As far as I can see, the nature
of peer governance is that leadership becomes both invitational a priori, and
one of arbitrage a posteriori, and the main problem is for leadership to
become a bottleneck rather than a facilitator. I believe the essential logic
of such emerging governance systems is the avoidance of the emergence of
collective individuals. A recent example is the conflict at couchsurfing, and
how it generates, not a forking, but an open movement to go beyond the core
leadership as bottleneck, see <BR><A
href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/forking-at-the-couchsurfing-hospitality-network/2007/05/08">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/forking-at-the-couchsurfing-hospitality-network/2007/05/08</A>
<BR><BR>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 5/7/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>R
Labossiere</B> <<A href="mailto:admin@klooj.net">admin@klooj.net</A>>
wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT>
<DIV><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>Thanks Sam for the
summary of David Bollier's paper, which is itself a summary of his notes
from an Aspen Institute round table. I remember the buzz
around "push" vs. "pull" models -- the ever finer articulation of
consumer demand that becomes determinative of production -- but
hadn't thought about it lately, esp. in relation to social
networks.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>More people
creating more themselves and being more active in creative
processes is a good thing, like education, lesbian moms and
apple pie:) </FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face=Arial>One problem, much discussed here and on other lists, is
about</FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2> effectiveness
and exploitation; and that's where I'm thinking agency theory might be
useful. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN></SPAN><SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>What I'm interested in
is the link between creation and reception, between creator and
audience, where </FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial
size=2><FONT face=Arial>are a number
of agent-like tasks:</FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face=Arial></FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>a) contact and
relationship building</FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>b) presentation
and promotion</FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>c) value
judgments</FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>d) aggregation
of responses, and </FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>e) publication
of response results. </FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face=Arial></FONT></FONT></SPAN><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>Agency theory has,
in my very limited understanding of it, arisen to resolve problems between
principals and agents due to incomplete and asymetric information,
inefficiencies that stifle effective representation. (Bernard Roddy pointed
out that the theory is 'burdened' by the business
context where these issues tend to have critical economic consequences,
but I don't see that as a reason to discount the theoretical apparatus as
such: an "agent" that fails to build good networks, misrepresents
the work or improperly values it, or who doesn't appropriately
provide feedback or celebrate success needs to held accountable,
whether we're talking about Chrysler or
MySpace:)</FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial>So the question
that arises is whether in the p2p environment of the Web, agency is
as efficient and effective as we tend to think it
is.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2>Speaking strictly from personal
experience, within relatively small networks like this one, I feel
represented and, in terms of the esteemed audience who I hope have read
this far down in this post, it seems quite
efficient.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2>anyway, this is intended only to
open discussion...</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sam's summary of Bollier's
paper:</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV><SPAN class=q>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.cooperationcommons.com/Documents/EntryView?id=129"
target=_blank>http://www.cooperationcommons.com/Documents/EntryView?id=129
</A></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV></SPAN>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2>Bollier's original
paper:</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.aspeninstitute.org/atf/cf/%7BDEB6F227-659B-4EC8-8F84-8DF23CA704F5%7D/2005InfoTechText.pdf"
target=_blank>http://www.aspeninstitute.org/atf/cf/%7BDEB6F227-659B-4EC8-8F84-8DF23CA704F5%7D/2005InfoTechText.pdf</A></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2>The principal-agent problem on
Wikipedia</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem"
target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem
</A></FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2>- Robert
Labossiere</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face=Arial></FONT></FONT></SPAN><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>iDC
-- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity (<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://distributedcreativity.org" target=_blank>
distributedcreativity.org</A>)<BR><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:iDC@mailman.thing.net">iDC@mailman.thing.net</A><BR><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc"
target=_blank>http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc</A><BR><BR>List
Archive:<BR><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/"
target=_blank>http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/ </A><BR><BR>iDC Photo
Stream:<BR><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/"
target=_blank>http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR
clear=all><BR>-- <BR>The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes
peer to peer alternatives.<BR><BR>Wiki and Encyclopedia, at <A
href="http://p2pfoundation.net">http://p2pfoundation.net</A>; Blog, at <A
href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</A>;
Newsletter, at <A
href="http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p">http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p</A><BR><BR>Basic
essay at <A
href="http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499">http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499</A>;
interview at <A
href="http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html">http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
</A>; video interview, at <A
href="http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/09/29/network_collaboration_peer_to_peer.htm">http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/09/29/network_collaboration_peer_to_peer.htm</A><BR><BR>The
work of the P2P Foundation is supported by <A
href="http://www.ws-network.com/04_team.htm">http://www.ws-network.com/04_team.htm</A>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>iDC -- mailing list
of the Institute for Distributed Creativity
(distributedcreativity.org)<BR>iDC@mailman.thing.net<BR>http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc<BR><BR>List
Archive:<BR>http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/<BR><BR>iDC Photo
Stream:<BR>http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>