101 Culture

This is a blog about the emergence of a digital culture. What might it look like? What can we see already?

And all my other details are kept at benmason.org.


Searching web

Obox Signature Series

The web could replace the law

There's some interesting discussion over at the BBC's Digital Revolution blog this week. They're discussing the effect the web is having on our brains. Whilst none of us actually believe we're heading towards a matrix-like future with jellied bodies and our brains plugged into the hive mind, the future might be closer than we thought.

"@oxfordyorick offered some very interesting insight... that our increased networking may be leading to a not altogether beneficial hegemony:

'the odd result that extensive Facebook exposure seems to be contracting the list of first names used for newborns: it is as if linking to larger intimate groups, and seeing what names they use, is causing a higher degree of mutual name-copying and the proportion of first names occupied by the top ten, names, say is shrinking in the English speaking world. This effect, if transferred to the realm of ideas, could be one we might not like: peer pressure to conform might grow in a way that would not need to be enforced by any Government or law.' "

So the web could replace government? That's too scary for Monday. To be re-visited.

Whuffie bank launches

A non-profit organisation called the Whuffie bank has launched. It seeks to "new currency that rewards people for their positive contributions on the web".

There's more about it here and here.

The concept of Whuffie is pertinent to this blog. With so many connections online and so many tiny transactions that are almost worthless (in current measures), the idea of a reputation-based currency is interesting. Web-heads spend so much time interacting in tiny ways with so many people. And it's valuable to us, otherwise we wouldn't do it. So perhaps a standard currency would encourage more fluid transactions online. It's a big idea, originally by Cory Doctorow, and it'll be interesting to watch it develop.

Here's their TechCrunch50 presentation:

Your Whuffie balance is derived by their algorithm. It's derived from your contribution (retweets), your reputation, endorsements from others and the content of your messages. People can make Whuffie deals with each other, or they can pass it around. And the plan is to allow people to use Whuffie for cash transaction as well. There are Whuffie credit cards and you can print bills.

It's at this point that I get confused. The Whuffie needs an exchange rate with the dollar. And so the Whuffie needs to have a perceived value for that to happen. So what it actually is is just a measure of a person's contribution to the web. This is valuable. I can understand someone's contribution without knowing them.

Whether it can become a realworld currency remains to be seen. That requires scarcity. Doctorow's novel described a post-scarcity economy where everything was free for the taking. We haven't reached that yet. There's an abundance of information online. But the value of the information depends on its context. And that might be the problem with Whuffie. It's not based on context. It seeks to create a standard value for reputation. But reputation, as pointed out in the questions session, is based on your relationship with the person, which is context.

Value music and pizza, not records

Lily Allen takes a stand against FAC, the group of artists that is speaking out against the governments plans to cut the internet connection of 'music pirates'.

But all her thoughts come from a desire to protect the industry, not protect music. "you get a huge debt from your record company, which you spend years working your arse off to repay. When you manage to get a contract, all those pretty videos and posters advertising your album have to be paid for and as the artist, you have to pay for them"

The recent music industry has been built around recording technology. The record was the item of perceived value. The first album was sold in 1909. The industry has honed itself to produce records, mostly polished collections of 3.5 minute tracks.

But consider a definition of music: "an artistic form of auditory communication incorporating instrumental or vocal tones in a structured and continuous manner". It's a form of communication. The internet has made communication cheaper and easier. It should be a great thing for music.

We may lose a few record labels. We may lose some recording studios.

But people still desire great music. So there will be commercial value in it somewhere. People just need to think a bit more laterally. I was in a pizzeria last week and someone made a simple point. In that situation, we're willing to pay for pizza and beer. But the cutlery, table, chairs and plates are considered free. Even the music in the background is considered free.

So if there is to be a large music industry, it needs to adjust its model so that recordings are perceived as free or cheap, because as I've previously explained, they're not scarce anymore, but that something else in the music is expensive.  Either make recordings much cheaper to produce and easier to buy or hide the cost in something of greater perceived value. I'd recommend trying both.

UPDATE:
A song pushed my way by @shakeandvac

"Re-issue ! Re-package ! Re-package !
Re-evaluate the songs
Double-pack with a photograph
Extra Track (and a tacky badge)"