Internet Swarms and Peer Production

816 views
775 views

Published on

Tallinn Presentation an KERG seminar

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
816
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
13
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • -my research is about open production methods -web 2.0: lock in + amateurs -highly skilled individuals vs. a lot of amateur individuals -user generated action
  • Internet Swarms and Peer Production

    1. 1. Internet Swarms and Peer Production <ul><li>Petri Kola </li></ul>
    2. 2. Physical vs. virtual <ul><li>tradition of physical metaphors in understanding computers/networks </li></ul><ul><li>but as a system the virtual is different </li></ul><ul><li>differences in friction, privacy,... </li></ul>
    3. 3. Examples of hard questions
    4. 4. Borrowing someone’s open WLAN <ul><li>Salo court in Finland decided that it was illegal to use an open WLAN without permission [Helsingin Sanomat: 14.4.2008] </li></ul>
    5. 5. Internet censorship <ul><li>secret block-list </li></ul><ul><li>no court involved in blocking decissions </li></ul><ul><li>can be bypassed in 10 seconds </li></ul><ul><li>blocking is DNS based </li></ul>
    6. 6. Stealing a file <ul><li>&quot;copying is stealing&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>technically, copying is not theft because the original copy remains </li></ul>
    7. 7. Economics and scarcity <ul><li>markets not recognizing scarcity of physical resources </li></ul><ul><li>markets creating pseudo-scarcity in the virtual </li></ul>
    8. 8. Micro contribution <ul><li>my hypothetical concept </li></ul><ul><li>doesn’t exist in physical reality </li></ul><ul><li>virtual community -> peer production </li></ul>
    9. 9. Driving forces <ul><li>productivity in cognitive work depends heavily on the right participants and resources meeting each other </li></ul><ul><li>open systems systematically better as administrative information processing systems </li></ul>
    10. 10. Combining contributions <ul><li>criteria </li></ul><ul><li>does the code run? </li></ul><ul><li>neutral point of view in Wikipedia </li></ul>
    11. 11. Forking <ul><li>branching from the main project </li></ul><ul><li>bad for the project -> the community tries to avoid it </li></ul><ul><li>“insurance for participation” </li></ul>
    12. 12. We need to recognize how virtual organizing is different.
    13. 13. Open peer production <ul><li>micro contributions </li></ul><ul><li>traceability - who did what </li></ul><ul><li>early feedback </li></ul><ul><li>undo </li></ul><ul><li>post priori authorization </li></ul>
    14. 14. Swarm like organization <ul><li>focus on action and achievement </li></ul><ul><li>unclear borders </li></ul><ul><li>emergent rules </li></ul><ul><li>doesn’t look like much </li></ul><ul><li>doesn’t have to succeed </li></ul>
    15. 15. Hacker attitudes <ul><li>creating, sharing </li></ul><ul><li>information-sharing as both an ideal and a practical strategy </li></ul><ul><li>hostility to secrecy </li></ul><ul><li>upholding the right to fork </li></ul><ul><li>emphasis on rationality </li></ul><ul><li>distaste for authority </li></ul><ul><li>playful cleverness </li></ul>
    16. 16. Produsage <ul><li>Production + Usage = Produsage </li></ul>
    17. 17. Swarm methaphor <ul><li>worth more research </li></ul><ul><li>stigmergy = indirect coordination between agents or actions </li></ul>

    ×