--- /dev/null
+---
+title: "What awaits us?"
+author: "Miłada Jędrysik"
+order: 1
+---
+
+{% block lead %}
+We live in a time of change, which is
+often compared to the revolution
+caused by the spread of printing.
+Then, at the time of Gutenberg, by
+extending the written word the
+information got outside a tiny elite
+circle of readers: the nobles and
+clergy, reaching to the middle
+class, and then to the masses.
+The democratic world in which we
+live today is a consequence of this
+particular revolution.
+{% endblock %}
+
+{% block text %}
+We are already aware of a number of consequences of
+civilizational transition from an analogue to a digital world,
+but a lot of them we probably cannot even imagine. A
+lot of them awakens in us fear, which is a healthy evolutionary response that allows our species to avoid the
+unknown dangers, but it is worth bearing in mind that
+some of these fears appear unreasonable in time (in the
+mid-nineteenth century passengers fainted during a train
+ride, so crazy and dangerous to man seemed the speed
+of a steam locomotive). Twenty years after the spread
+of the Internet we are able to see the trends that seem
+to be shaping further development of the digital world.
+During the workshop we chose 17 trends that we considered the most important for the future of social circulation of information, culture, creativity and knowledge,
+i.e. goods covered by intellectual monopolies.
+
+
+
+Globalization
+-------------
+
+Globalization is a process the development of digitization has sped up. Today we are able to transfer large
+amounts of data in a very short time. A feature film,
+all episodes of the show, an entire discography – to
+download them through a broadband network is a
+matter of a few minutes. Internet does not know - at
+least for now - any borders. “Gangnam Style”, a hit by
+the Korean singer Psy, is approaching two billion views
+on YouTube. Streaming music services cover larger
+and larger areas of the world. Google and Facebook
+are global powers.
+
+These capabilities are also in benefit to companies that
+provide files in violation of copyright laws.
+
+Execution of violations of the law in the internet raises
+issues arising from the technology. Place of company
+headquarters, place in which there are servers with
+nonauthorizated files, place in which the violation was
+done by sharing the file, and the country in which it
+was downloaded - those may be different states (jurisdictions) with different copyright rules.
+
+An effort is made to regulate global trade, including
+the exchange of files and services on the Web, by trade
+agreements - some of them, like ACTA or TTIP, raise
+concern that, under the banner of fighting “piracy”,
+users will be deprived of the right to use resources in
+accordance with the principles of fair use or they will
+become subjects to control clearly violating civil rights.
+
+It is also discussed whether issues regarding intellectual monopolies when it comes to cultural works
+should be treated differently than in the case of traditional industries.
+
+The digital globalization is also an opportunity to work
+as distributed teams, as in the case of Wikipedia - an
+encyclopaedia created by volunteers from around the
+world. This puts, among other things, new light on the
+concept of authorship of the work - who is the author
+of an entry in Wikipedia or a crowdsourcing translation?
+
+We might also ask, more generally, whether the creative
+process is an individual flash of genius that creates ex
+nihilo, or the collective effort of the community based
+on the achievements of its predecessors? The answer
+to this question lies between the folklore-inspired poems of the Romantics and the Internet remix today.
+
+
+
+Exponential growth in the availability of content and ease of dissemination
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+The development of broadband Internet and more
+“capable” miniaturising memory gives us the ability
+to copy and transfer more and more data. Every 24
+months the number of transistors in microprocessors doubles.
+
+The data are not measured in megabytes, gigabytes
+and terabytes anymore – there being peta-, iexa-, zetta- and yottabytes.
+
+More and more of what has been written using zeroes and ones is within our immediate reach. An e-book
+is purchased with one click, and after a few seconds
+you can read it on your reader. Viral content in social
+media may reach hundreds of thousands of users in
+a few hours – a “selfie” of Ellen DeGeneres with the
+winners of the Oscars in 2014 beat the record for most
+retweets: two million.
+
+
+Development of informal circulation of content as a condition for the development of decentralized infrastructure
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+On the Polish Internet there circulates a photo from
+1980s showing young people at a concert - all with their
+hands up, all holding cassette recorders, all recording.
+The informal circulation is nothing new; it appears everywhere where someone or something restricts access
+to content. In communist countries it took a form of
+samizdat, when it came to content limited by political
+censorship. Those who had access to the latest records
+from the West copied them on cassettes and sold or
+distributed to their friends.
+
+A decentralized infrastructure, such as P2P (peer to
+peer), is more difficult to control. It is also a convenient
+way to exchange files directly between users, bypassing distributors, regardless of whether they provide
+movies and music with the consent of the owners or
+without this consent.
+
+In the digital world the informal circulation has a greater extent, but the motivations are the same as in the
+days of analogue world - on the one hand there is the
+desire to escape the censorship or surveillance, which -
+as we know from the information furnished by Edward
+Snowden or activities of the Chinese censors - can
+achieve the size incomparable with anything before.
+
+On the other hand – it is a response to access barriers.
+The “premium” cultural offer is beyond the reach of
+most internet users, both for financial and technical reasons - the media companies reluctantly enter smaller
+markets, believing that it does not pay them.
+
+Still others believe that by sharing resources of knowledge and culture they contribute to the social justice,
+bridging the barriers of access for the disadvantaged.
+
+
+Development of the free software movement
+-----------------------------------------
+
+Similarly to P2P networks, free software, i.e. the code
+freely available that may be controlled and modified
+by its users, is a response to the threat of surveillance
+and information environment control. This is a solution
+for those who want to be sure that their software does
+not spy on them and does not limit the possibility by
+artificial barriers produced by the equipment manufacturers or proprietary software.
+
+Free software is also selected by those who like the pro-social and socially aware aspect of its creation - everyone can benefit from someone else’s work without the
+fear of copyright infringement; anyone can contribute
+to the community building.
+
+
+“We want to be premium”
+-----------------------
+
+“We want to be premium” that is to say: we want to
+watch the new season of our favourite series right now,
+immediately, together with users from the United States.
+
+In the globalized world with copying files and informal
+circulation of content on the Internet it is easy to realize
+one’s cultural aspirations, even if you do not happen to
+be a premium consumer – either due to financial reasons or lack of services in a given country. When Netflix,
+an American company that provides streaming movies
+and TV series, released the second season of “House
+of Cards”, it turned out that Poland came second (after
+the United States) as regards the number of episodes
+downloaded from torrents, far ahead of other countries
+in which Netflix already operates.
+
+Streaming services are developing rapidly, but not fast
+enough to avoid consumers in poorer and smaller countries to feel “worse” because these services have not
+arrived there yet. Some want to “legalize” their need to
+be a premium consumer as soon as possible, because they can afford that, and they believe it is only fair.
+Others, when having to choose between a paid service
+and the “free” one, will always choose the latter, because the subscription seems too expensive or because they do not want to contribute to millions earned by
+producers and distributors.
+
+
+Dominance of two business models of network intermediaries
+----------------------------------------------------------
+
+Today the monetization of circulation of culture in the
+Internet is carried out in one of two business models.
+In the first model, the intermediary (e.g. Amazon, iTunes, Spotify) earns on the sale of access to content, the
+commodity being, therefore, information (music, video,
+e-book) sought by the user. As a result, the intermediary aims at strict control over the flow of content, shutting it in their own system by preventing its copying to
+the hard drive, or reproducing with devices that are not
+their product. In return for a fee, you receive access on
+terms favorable to the intermediary. Fair use is therefore limited by the technology ( technological protection
+measures, TPM). In the second model data about users
+is monetized. In such a way, platforms such as Google
+and Facebook operate. The commodity here is not the
+content, but rather the information about users, their behaviour on the Web, preferences, friends. The platforms
+base on the works created or distributed by the users
+themselves. In the interest of these companies is not,
+therefore, a really broad fair use, which would legalize
+alternative social media, based on peer-2-peer networks.
+
+These two models originally competed with each other,
+because holders of the rights to content did not want
+their works to leak out of their system and appear on the
+platform, while owners of platforms were interested in
+as heavy traffic on their sites as possible, the issue of copyright being not a priority for them. With time, Internet
+companies began to use both models at the same time,
+because both produce the greatest profit today, monetizing the network effect.
+
+
+Easy access to content
+----------------------
+
+Clients expect comfort. And they are ready to pay for it
+with money, security or freedom. Therefore, comfort is
+the best (perhaps the only) tool, which can break the informal circulation of content. With the avalanche of access,
+you can “buy” consumers offering them - at a reasonable
+price - high quality and ease of use. No more broken connections, depixelised images, incomplete files that break
+off when we were about to find out who is the killer. End
+of e-books and audiobooks, in which chapters get torn.
+
+The customer of the twenty-first century will buy it
+under one condition: that everything will take no more
+than three clicks. If you have to copy anything, fill in never-ending forms, or fight with incompatible formats,
+you choose another intermediary.
+
+
+Growing importance of the law in protecting the professional market
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+International treaties, such as ACTA, new legal regulations
+in different countries, tools allowing us to keep track of
+depleting profits of the distributors due to consumer behaviour: the world’s legal systems are slowly adapting to
+the digital world. Fair use, which is borrowing a book, a
+movie on a physical medium, to friends or acquaintances
+at a time when you had to have personal contact between
+borrowers, was limited to a range of one or a few dozen
+of people. In the digital era it requires a new definition,
+because where is the limit? In the digital age, however,
+private use allowed by law requires a new interpretation
+of “the circle of friends”. Five thousand friends, because
+so many you can have on Facebook? In fact friends on
+FB are often closer to us than our colleagues from work,
+even though we might have never seen the first eye-to-eye and the latter we see every day.
+
+The European Commission is just about to change the
+European Directive of 2001 harmonizing the copyright
+law in Europe, which was created under strong pressure from media companies counting on the longest binding force of exclusive rights and limiting exceptions. On
+the other hand, the United States from which the bulk
+of the so-called Big Content (i.e. corporations gaining
+from copyright ownership, for example Walt Disney
+Company), is trying to impose further trade treaties,
+transferring its legislation (and the balance of power)
+for the rest of the globe. The adaptation process to the
+realities of the Web is in progress, the nearest future
+will show which way it will go.
+
+
+Polarization of interests between consumers and businesses and governments
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+The interest of the recipient has already been defined –
+to have access to everything as comfortable as possible,
+free of charge or at a reasonable price. The business
+interest is, of course, to have the greatest profit, even
+at the cost of limiting access. European authorities in
+accordance with the liberal worldview feel primarily responsible for shaping an environment conducive
+to business, treating contemporary culture as further
+areas for commodification.
+
+The copyright-holders - both auttors and intermediaries - are afraid of new business models, such as streaming services, which compensate for the low price of
+the service with their massive character. Some intermediaries also trying to concentrate in their hands full
+copyright, treating authors who provide content quite
+instrumentally. Therefore, some authors believe that it
+is more profitable to lobby for prolonging the validity
+of these laws, narrowing fair use and providing punishment. As a result they find it more profitable to lobby for prolonging the validity of these laws, narrowing
+fair use and providing punishment. In some countries,
+politicians are inclined to these expectations and exacerbate the prosecution of copyright violations, not
+sparing the public funds, as in the case of the French
+government agency HADOPI.
+
+Some authors try to overcome these conflicts, bypassing
+intermediaries, and addressing the audience directly,
+whether it means offering all or part of their production for free, or collecting voluntary network fee before or after the creation of the work (crowdfunding).
+Also some intermediaries tolerate the grey area, seeing
+it as a potential for future customer hunting and field
+research on their preferences.
+
+Today one can see that in fact the profits and markets
+of the creative industry, although declining in certain narrow sectors (e.g. profits from sales of Cds) grow
+(games, video) or remain at a high level (music, books).
+And this despite the alleged global crisis.
+
+
+Convergence of the media
+------------------------
+
+Gone are the days when a newspaper offered you something to read, the radio – just something to hear,
+and a television just show – something to watch. They
+were three different incompatible technologies. On the
+Internet everything is a stream of bits, so it is possible
+to combine different forms of communication within
+a single site or material. “The New York Times” has set
+new journalistic routes with its material of 2013 about
+an avalanche in Tunnel Creek, containing the text next
+to video materials, slideshows, interactive maps and
+video covers illustrating the beginning of each chapter, in which, for example, in the background the snow
+was falling.
+
+Today it seems to be something quite obvious to us that
+the text on the Web is illustrated not only by a photo
+but also an embedded video. In the newspaper applications for tablets and smartphones, more and more
+moves, plays or changes.
+
+It also works the other way - the layout of paper
+media increasingly resembles the Internet, and the
+same thing happens with television stations: whizzing around the main image are strips of news and
+comments.
+
+Convergence also has social consequences - the “old”
+media adapting to the Internet also take over the “social
+order” and weaken the former dividing line on the active senders and passive recipients, e.g. allowing commenting on their texts or mixing professional journalistic texts with texts of users.
+
+
+Changing patterns of cultural consumption
+-----------------------------------------
+
+Until recently we have been consuming culture either
+frequently moving or accepting passively what was
+delivered to our house. We went to the cinema, theatre, concerts and meetings with authors - this has not
+changed, and even becomes more important in the situation when you have any content at your fingertips.
+In this system personal contact with the artist becomes an even more special experience. But we are no
+longer condemned to zapping with our remote control
+on a few dozen channels in the hope of finding something interesting, or to borrowing videos, CDs and books from our friends.
+
+Everything is on the Internet, what is more, it is not worth
+possessing. The focus moves from having the work on
+a physical medium to being able to have quick access
+to it online. This can lead - and there are already indications of this happening – to the secondary growth of
+interest in physical media, such as vinyl records.
+
+On the screen of a smartphone or tablet movies, books, music, images are available 24/7, in places and times so far unheard of - you can listen to music while
+riding a bike or running on a treadmill, read in the queue, watch in a hospital bed.
+
+Formerly to share with someone intangible cultural
+products demanded quite a complicated physical operation – recording a record or film or transferring them
+on a tape or disc. If you desired a book, you had to take
+the trouble to visit a friend, take it under your arm, and
+carry it home, not to mention an inevitable social chat
+on the occasion. Now to share a photo or video clip, if
+not with the whole of humanity, at least with a wide
+circle of friends, you only need one click on the social
+networking site, one little button that says “SHARE”.
+
+This revolutionary change, which redefines the concept of ownership and moves the centre of gravity of
+ownership from material goods to the community of
+experience, may be important for the future of economic systems and social relations.
+
+
+Growing importance of competencies in the management of information
+-------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+The plethora of content means that it is necessary to
+acquire new competencies on the part of both users
+and content providers.
+
+We already know that the search in the search engines
+is loaded with curvature brought by algorithms, a filter
+bubble, making the users see different search results
+depending on their history of visiting the Web. Anyone
+who does not get lost on the network as if he were in
+the enchanted forest, is able to competently search
+for information on the Internet, who can manage their profile on the social networking site so that content
+reaches where planned to, who is aware of what traces
+personal information “leaves” in the network and how
+to preserve privacy, will have an advantage over others,
+as in the past the ones who could read to the illiterate.
+
+The same applies to those who provide content. Those
+who deliver it in such a way as to satisfy the user in
+terms of transparency and functionality of the service,
+and with the increasing public awareness of the problem, perhaps soon also guaranteeing privacy, will win.
+
+
+Growing importance of content filtering skills
+----------------------------------------------
+
+Avalanche access to content raises the need for new
+forms of guidance. An iconic figure in the world of new
+journalism is, for instance, Andy Carvin of U.S. public
+radio NPR (now First Look Media), who introduces himself as a “real-time news DJ & occasional journalist”,
+DJ information on the Internet. Thanks to his commitment on Twitter (he has 102,000 followers) events such
+as the Egyptian spring of 2011 or attack on the Boston
+Marathon in 2013 began to take shape and meaning on
+the Internet, that without his mediation probably would
+not be interested by the subject or would rely only on
+the information noise in which they were not able to
+distinguish real messages from distortions.
+
+Carvin checked the reliability of sources, denounced
+fabricated revelations, drew people attention to important details. He served the same role as a journalist with
+experience in the traditional media, except for the fact
+that he based on other material input – twitts by others.
+
+Just like in the library we always needed a meaningful and transparent catalogue so on the Web we need
+guides who would order the world for us, because they
+know it better and have the time we are lacking. It could
+be one person who would create playlists or the whole
+site designed to become an aid for those seeking the
+light among yottabytes of information.
+
+Another thing that has changed is the fact that in addition to the voice of anointed experts we take into account the preferences of our friends (who liked something
+on the Web or shared it with us). Services providing content put on recommendation systems based precisely on the activity of one’s friends (“Your friend, Antek,
+liked Beethoven”) tell us what might be of interest for
+us. This is another element of the democratization of
+cultural consumption.
+
+But our tastes today are also steered by algorithms that
+suggest the user what he might like based on his previous behaviour on the Web. Such dehumanization of
+the process may seem dangerous for the community
+nature of culture and autonomy of users.
+
+
+Experience economy
+------------------
+
+For the last dozen years or so, economists have been
+pointing out that the real commodity on the market is
+the experience offered to the customers. The experience
+economy theory becomes particularly important when
+there are a lot of goods that are easily accessible, as it
+is in the case of the Internet. A unique experience can
+be – along with convenience - a factor which induces
+consumers to pay for the service, even though it does
+not involve a great effort to obtain it for free. Therefore,
+for example, the artists collecting funds for the creation
+of their works on crowdfunding sites offer the donors
+their autographs, T-shirts with the logo of the project
+or even dinner.
+
+Such an experience is an added value, determined directly by the creator or intermediary - to a lesser extent,
+therefore, it relates to the circulation of content without
+respecting copyrights. It may therefore help to alleviate
+tensions between users and intermediaries or authors,
+if the barrier of access to these unique experiences is
+not too high (e.g. free gadgets and an acceptable price).
+In another case it will only exacerbate these tensions.
+
+
+Two cultural markets – professional and amateur
+-----------------------------------------------
+
+Two cultural markets - professional and amateur - have
+existed probably since the first cave paintings authors began to distinguish themselves from other inhabitants of
+the caves as holders of special talent. At the end of the
+analogue world they were already encapsulated with long
+established taboos and institutional props. On the road
+of long emancipation from the guild craftsman the artist
+has become almost superhuman, thanks to the bestowal
+of special talents. But artists had to take artistic education, to adopt patterns of high culture, and then register
+their business in an appropriate association - only then
+could they become professional creators. Documenting
+their professionalism - especially in the countries of real
+socialism - gave them more rights than amateurs - to
+perform on stage, to royalties.
+
+Internet with its weakening hierarchies - not only for
+the artists - disturbed this order of things. Suddenly it
+turned out that an amateur is not only a homely artist
+exhibiting matches paintings in the local community
+centre, but also one of dozens of thousands of internet
+users, no worse, and often better at what they do, than
+dozens of professional artists.
+
+A question now arises whether a gifted photographer,
+who on his blog earns on contextual advertising, is an artist or an amateur? The criterion of the creation for free is
+difficult to be fitted into the online reality. Anyway, Franz
+Kafka also did not write for money. If you can speak in
+this case of any clear trend, it may rather be such that
+“amateurs around the world joined together” - their work
+is simply more visible and more accessible.
+
+An easier access to customers on the part of creators
+who have not passed regulating artistic education and
+have not been anointed by the guards of the canon, is
+reflected in the discourse they use: there is more strands
+of contesting dominant narratives.
+
+
+Increase of the prestige of professional artists on the cultural market and prices of their original works. Exclusivity of the physical contact with the artist
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+Easy to copy works in the digital age make it necessary to define the notion of authenticity. When the Polish
+surrealist painter Zdzisław Beksiński, an enthusiast of
+new technologies, began to copy his drawings on the
+photocopier, the recipients had serious doubts whether
+they were actually dealing with a work of art. The master
+would ask a rhetorical question, why nobody doubts in
+woodcuts or linocuts, but apparently even the theoretical possibility of copying the work indefinitely raises
+questions as to its uniqueness.
+
+The same questions arose when the distinguished living
+British painter David Hockney drew beautiful still lives (incidentally, using free software) at his first iPad, where the
+value added was a flash of the glass screen of the device.
+
+Some accept readily these new techniques of creativity,
+others will still prefer the possibility of physical contact
+with the material and will be prepared to pay a lot for it.
+
+The search for originality and uniqueness can be seen
+even in the case of works that are mass-reproduced by
+their very nature: comics, cartoons and games - original
+boards rising in price.
+
+Also important today is the possibility of physical contact
+with the creator. If Spotify earns 0,006 to 0,084 dollars
+for one playing of a song, only a really popular artist may
+consider his revenue from this site a significant item in
+the family budget. Much more could be earned by playing concerts. A lot of experts say that in the near future a
+direct meeting with the artist can be one of the most important sources of his income. And this applies not only to
+performing artists; writers earn even more on meetings
+and other public appearances than on selling their books.
+
+
+New, for example, bodily forms of consumption and exploitation of cultural goods resulting from the development of technology
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+In April 2012 at a concert by rapper Snoop Dogg there
+appeared in a hologram another rapper Tupac Shakur
+killed 16 years before. According to the viewers’ he “looked almost like a living person, and it was hard to believe that the real Tupac is not on stage”. The hologram of
+Tupac is just one example of augmented reality, which
+is offered to us in the new digital world. Connecting the
+real world with virtual reality is within reach, not only
+in the cinema 3D. Experiments with implanting people
+microdevices that will ensure that their perception capabilities significantly expand have already begun. This
+will open before us entirely new ways of receiving or
+participating in a work of art.
+
+
+{% endblock %}
fnp / static.git / blobdiff