After Bittorrent: Dark Nets to Native Data - Eric Paulos
  • No tags were found...

After Bittorrent: Dark Nets to Native Data - Eric Paulos

After Bittorrent: DarkNets to Native DataWhat are the implications of the inherent reflexivity of the Internet for the designprofessions? Anthony Burke argues that radically innovative and distributed forms ofinformation exchange such as BitTorrent suggest a general shift away from the traditionalconception of the architect as master builder to one more in line with the collaborativeremixing and patching tactics of the hacker. BitTorrent is a communications protocol thatallows massive information exchange across infinite users with minimum resources. Throughits shear force of collectively pooled imagination, it provides a potent example of the sorts ofplatforms of information exchange that foster the new forms of communal organisation thatMichael Hardt and Antonio Negri term ‘the Multitude’, and which productively challengeconventional models of cultural invention and production. In this context, Burke raisesquestions about the implications of this broader shift for the design professions’ businessorganisation, as well as its more general methodologies.Student work from 101 Arch Studio, Stripmall v2.0, University of California, Berkeley, September 2005Developmental studies of collective component intelligence based on simple l o cal relationships. Students: Byro nChang, Christine Chang and Joseph Chieng.88

Nothing is easier than to admit in words the truth of the universalstruggle for life, or more difficult – at least I have found it so – thanconstantly to bear this conclusion in mind.Charles Darwin, On Natural Selection 1Architecture is undergoing a radical transformation in the faceof developing organisational imperatives resulting from anintense period of theoretical, technical and social co-evolutionof the logics of networks and complexity. As a result, thestatus of design more generally is being deeply interrogatedand requalified. Witnessing the progression from object tooperation to organisation fuelled by complexity theory andadvances in information technologies over the last decade, thepotentials of metastructural architectures of organisation arenow being explored by designers, as much as the potentials ofa new architect. While it is true that we are undergoing a kindof network fever, 2 post-complexity network logics offer ahighly integrated philosophy of relational orders in an ecologyof instrumental contextual registers that exceed thecultural/aesthetic interpretations of network thinking from the1960s and 1970s by articulating a clear mathematical logic aswell as material practice within its schema.While architecture owes much to the precedents of theMetabolists, Archigram and New Babylon, today’s networkstructures exceed the imperatives of architecture’s visual/socialregimes, instead looking past the singular object to theoperational and structural continuums of dynamicorganisations of massively distributed agents and resources, andthe evolution of contextually responsive information ecologies.At stake for architecture is the requalification of design asan act of negotiation, simultaneously more intrinsic and moreextrinsic to the traditional notion of practice. That is to say, inmany disciplines, as well as architecture, the relational logicsthat organise flows, that parse information, that allowinteraction, be they biological, chemical, material or spatial,have moved from a model of external, or predefined, form asapplied to matter, to an intrinsic model where form is theexpression of the interaction and characteristics of thematerial intelligence that constitutes it. 3 Form, then, is notimbued or fixed; rather it must be encouraged and drawnforth through the expression of contextual, internal andmaterial forces, and it is the negotiation between thesefactors that determines ultimate expression. Both extrinsic inthat this thinking places the role of the designer in a metarelationshipto the object, instead working as a strategist andnegotiator, organising networks of relationships to ‘breed’ afitter species, and intrinsic in that the expressions of thatnegotiation are dependent on properties of material(molecular) organisation. 4 Hence the enthusiasm aftercomplexity in the study of network logics over a broad rangeof disciplines as an activation of potentials embeddedprecisely within those organising relationships.This material philosophy 5 now has the mathematical lawsof small-world networks and power laws to corroborate andexplain many natural and social phenomena. Duncan WattsStudent work from 101 Arch Studio, Stripmall v2.0, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley, September 2005Developmental studies of collective component intelligence based on simplelocal relationships. Students: Christian Olavesen, Alina Grobe and AndrewDomnitz.89

Anthony Burke and Eric Paulos, 180x120 installation, San Franciso MoMA member sessionsevent, 24 October 2005Using 180 RFID tags to track and plot location over time, guests to this installation collectivelyconstruct a register of the event and the installation itself through building a history of movementt h roughout the space over 120 minutes. The projected histogram builds over time, revealing cro w dintelligence, patterns of crowd distribution, zones of intensity and pre f e r red locations as well asinteraction with the screen itself. This installation was created by Anthony Burke, Eric Paulos forSFMoMA member sessions event on 24 October 2005 .A tessellated paper screen embeds the anticipated histogram within the depthof the geometry of each tile unit. The overlay of projected real-time informationupdated every 60 seconds reveals the gap between fore cast and re a l i t y.Screen shot of histogram build.Laser-cut templates for the creation of each unique tile.90

and Steven Strogatz summarise the potentials of small-worldnetworks, stating in their ground-breaking paper ‘Collectivedynamics of “small-world” networks’ for Nature magazine in1998 that: ‘Models of dynamic systems with small-worldcoupling display enhanced signal propagation speed,computational power, and synchronizability.’ 6 That is to say,understanding how to recognise and utilise the dynamics andorganisational structure of networks of coupled dynamicsystems leads to vastly improved communications,intelligence and coordination within any system – social,technical or chemical. These relationships organise aroundboth hierarchically clear (exogenic) and emergent (endogenic)structural logics that necessarily coexist in the developmentof complex systems and are most highly optimised in a state‘somewhere between these two extremes’. 7As the threshold of autonomous computational agentssurfaces as an active constituent of both our design space andour environment, we are compelled to recognise thecombined intelligence of the material environment and thevirtual environment (or software agents) and to bring theminto an information-rich design space. Negotiating thebalance of design partners along these lines opens thepotential of this active communal space for design, andcapitalises on a collective systemic intelligence that embedsmultiplicity (both/and) within the reformulation of thestructural relationships of network performance, invokingentirely novel trajectories for material expression and spatialorganisation in the process.The shift in status of information itself also signals animmanent regime change for design, and it is both thecurrency and superfluity of information that enables thesenetworked developments. According to Hans Christian vonB a e y e r , 8 all material systems can be understood as a functionof their informational content, and reduced to the basic atomof information, the bit, with the qubit 9 extending this logicinto the quantum universe. The structural logic thatorganises fluid informational molecules from qubits tofeature-length movies and gives them meaning underpins areconsideration of design practice, product and place in lightof new orders of performance involving human,environmental and informational (artificial intelligence)collaborators. The challenge for architecture, then, is moresocial than technical. As the frame of reference arounddesign is projected into an engaged and productive space ofnegotiation, an architecture mired in the cult of the object isunable to utilise the advantages of collective organisationand interconnection, preferring tidy distinctions and clearboundaries over protocols of exchange within deep networks.The Distributed UndergroundStudies of the creation of information show not only aprofoundly massive amount of data being produced everyyear, but that more than 550 times more data resides in the‘deepnets’ and ‘darknets’ well below the radar of browsersand search engines than is visible in the surface net. 10A darknet is a private virtual network benignly equated tofriend-to-friend networks or, in more provocative terms, thedomain of the illicit file-sharing communities and home to thedigital resistance. The term was coined in 2003 by Microsoftresearchers who state that: ‘The darknet is not a separatephysical network but an application and protocol layer ridingon existing networks.’ 1 1 Darknets are networks limited to aselect group of users through encryption and structuralsecurity measures paradoxically built around logics of extremedistribution and flexibility. Darknets, Deepnet and DarkInternet are terms that have arisen to articulate thebalkanisation of information space into differing structuralregimes responding to environmental parameters such asprivacy, anonymity, community and security. 1 2 As theattorneys of the Hollywood studios and the recordingindustries continue to pursue legal action against the likes ofB i t T o r r e n t 1 3 through targeting file indexes and traffic hubs,they continue to unwittingly push the pace of development forcontent distribution systems and cement attitudes ofinformation freedom in the file-sharing public, sending thedevelopment of distributed structures and their supportingtechnologies on a trajectory aimed deeper and deeperunderground. Rather than the democracy of information of theInternet, in Web 2.0 1 4 the vast majority of data will be dark.In this light, many theorists believe the copyright wars weare in the midst of are the death throws of mass media as wehave known it. The underlying architectures of networks nolonger favour large companies with the infrastructure andequipment required to both create content and distribute it.More importantly, the operational understanding ofdistributed systems has become socially entrenched, such thatto a whole generation of users, accessing distributed contentis a fundamental right and simultaneously as pedestrian asemail. File-sharing networks have grown to accommodate ageneration of users where, as Clay Shirky describes, ‘everyoneis a media outlet … There are no more consumers because in aworld where an email address constitutes a media channel,we are all producers now.’ 15While users now expect all content to be mutable,fundamentally a worldview of collective organisation and fullydistributed content spread over contextually scalablenetworks rivals, if not replaces, the culture of the commercialmonolith, constituting the conditions for a post-consumermentality. 16 The development of distributed file-sharingstructures over the last five years not only charts asophistication of the advanced structural logic of networktheory as it becomes instrumentalised, but mirrors a societaltransfer of organisational logics from the stabile to themobile. While we were downloading MP3s we were alsotrading paradigms.Activating Organizational Structures… centralized schemes work poorly for illegal object distributionbecause large, central servers are large single points of failure. 1791

The multimodal healing algorithm allows for graceful performance degradation.Self-healing minefield mobile node test hopping out of a ditch.Location of the first two demonstrations relative to the viewing stand.93

that bring network theory into network practice, the militaryis already testing a slew of distributed weapons, surveillanceand overlaying information gathering, processing andanalysis networks that are as physically active as they areinformationally.In the Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) paradigm, battlespace agentsautonomously perform selected tasks delegated by actors/shooters anddecision-makers including controlling sensors. Network-Centricelectronic warfare (NCEW) is the form of electronic combat used inNCW. Focus is placed on a network of interconnected, adaptingsystems that are capable of making choices about how to survive andachieve their design goals in a dynamic environment. … The gridscarry a flood of data and information among the entities that can beused to increase the tempo of operations. This flood will overwhelmhuman actors and decision-makers. 23Embedded organisational intelligence takes over the day-todayinformation gathering and processing while humaninteractions with these intelligent systems exist at thestrategic level and humans become tuned to a higher-orderstructural and operational intelligence schema. As databreeds, or automatically assembles and constitutes new data,interaction with human actors is not only marginalised at thelevel of the field, but actually problematic. We are out of theimmediate decision loop because our capacity to make largeamounts of time for critical low-level decisions from vastarrays of interconnected factors is inadequate. As sensordevices and AI engines propagate in the fertile conditions oftheir own information ecology, human participation innetworks of communication and decision-making has at animmediate level become categorically undesirable. Ournetworks are thinking for us.NativeAnother study in Nature, looking at the global network’s growthdynamics of the Web, confirms the idea that the World Wide Webfollows natural laws and can be studied as ‘an ecology of knowledge’. 2 4The power laws, small-world behaviours and super-hubs ofnetwork theory, while applied to information andcommunication systems, were initially revealed not ininformation science, but through mathematics, biology andsociology. Structures of networks are based on mathematicallaws, but biological and social systems exemplify thesestructures and formally describe the complex processes thatcapitalise on the evolutionary properties of a networked andcollaborative intelligence.As self-generating data frees itself from our control it couldbe said to go native, developing more complex informationalecologies and necessarily changing our interaction with it.Technically we become unencumbered by the need to createthe raw material that our sensors now do for us, and asnegotiator/designers we are motivated to organise and edit asa creative act. Like botanists, as information ecologies flower,we will trim (delete) unproductive or overly productivebranches of data and splice and graft (copy/paste/hyperlink)streams of information to cultivate new hybrid species(threads). As data goes native, we can speculate on thepossibilities of cultivating large crops of information types formass consumption (for example, popular music) as well aslavish and manicured parcels of highly articulate but privateor limited gardens of code (such as private banking). Finally,we can consider the extremes of truly wild data, venturinginto those forests for recreation or prospecting. 25The act of design strategically broadens and we are not onlyworking in a context of data, but with data as a partner. Theability to operate in this medium will depend on theintelligence of the tools we can create and the partnershipswith our software intelligences that can be cultivated.Developing and maturing relationships with a largercomputational intelligence in this context is highly likely, andit is entirely possible that given the growth of ai, practices willdevelop their digital personas as an enduring set of designprocesses and preferences that represent a collective of likemindeddesigners. This highly ‘practice-specific’ software,trained over an extended period, ultimately embodies anevolved ethos of design amounting to a collective and directeddesign intelligence. Again, this is to some degree already inplace with dumb software, where a design office will develop away of working with it that suits them, collecting informationthat is continually used or referred to, creating their ownhacks and patches and essentially activating collectiveintelligence in a fairly benign way. Similarly, the nature oftraditional disciplinary discreet practice is challenged, as whatcould be thought of as intellectual property of one disciplineor another (say, architecture or engineering) is transformedinto a common project space and with it the space of a designethos rather than a disciplinary speciality.The surface properties of a living being were controlled by the inside,what is visible by what is hidden. Form, attributes and behavior allbecame expressions of organization. 26Similarly, forecast is the change in the nature of ourrelationship to the processes and tools we develop and use and,consequently, the expression of those tools and processes in thegeneration of form. The negotiation between architect andsoftware (intelligent or routine) both disempowers the architectfrom the sole genius role and empowers him or her throughthe integration of information and a continually evolving rangeof intelligent computationally derived generative techniques.The architect as director essentially stages the project, guidingfinal formal outcomes as a product of intrinsic processesengendered from the collective power of the informationalenvironment that surrounds the design space. Form fromwithin is shaped, tested and reshaped, built on a series ofrelated informational (molecular) constraints and thepossibilities of their material and organisational expression.94

As the environments we design are themselves becomingintelligent, they require something more like an ongoingrelationship to negotiate or manage their evolution over amuch-extended period. Integrating aware surfaces, andcomputational power, designers will come to approach projectspaces the same way they approach software, installingupdates, tweaks and working out bugs periodically whileadjusting to new environmental parameters, entailing ongoingmonitoring and analysis. Ultimately, ‘patching’ and ‘hacking’environmental systems will become a new strain within thepurview of the evolved discipline and its new architects.Architecture in this context can be seen not as theproduction of built products, but the development of ideas andmethods that result in vectors of research marked by builtmoments. In this sense, practice itself becomes a locus of designwhere formal inconclusions or delay are not a temporarymoment before reaching some ideal architecture or final form,but rather an ideal state in and of itself. It is the goal: to remainopen, responsive and fluid, to negotiate and renegotiate as newcontextual pressures become apparent; to imagine practice as aproject within which projects may be built but are nevercomplete, but are always in a state of evolution.Information wants to be free. 27As a generation of users executing a mastery over media weexpect to engage with a two-way interactivity completelyunlike unidirectional traditional media and architecture,where assembly and organisation create meaning, forecastingthe transformation of the figure of the architect necessarilyalong the lines of the negotiator. Design becomes the ability toactivate patterns and relationships and to construct intelligenttools. The architect becomes a builder of spatial contracts,organising computational agents towards specific performativegoals achieved through designing the relational matrix of thedesign space. The role of the architect is to arrange theseagents into a hierarchy of prominence, to foster a communityof intelligent agents to work towards sympathetic goalsthrough mediation of the protocols determining the flows ofhighly networked information. The transfer of the architect’srole requires trading in the romance of form as an endpointfor the courage to embrace a distributed and expansivelyoperational disciplinary trajectory of collaborative intelligencewithin a network-centric framework. 4Text © 2006 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Images: p 88 © Byron Chang, ChristineChang and Joseph Chieng; p 89 Christian Olavesen, Alina Grobe and AndrewDominitz; p 90 © Anthony Burke; pp 93-94 From Glenn Rolader, John Rogersand Jad Batteh, ‘Self-healing minefields’, in Raja Suresh (ed), BattlespaceDigitization and Network-Centric Systems IV, Proceedings of SPIE, Vol 5441,SPIE (Bellingham, WA), 2004Notes1. Charles Darwin, On Natural Selection, Penguin Books (New York), 2004, p 1;extract taken from ‘The origin of the species’, first published in 1859.2. Mark Wi g l e y, ‘Network Fe v e r ’, in Grey Room 4, MI T P ress (Cambridge, MA), 2001 .3. Manuel DeLanda has written extensively on this philosophical framework:see Manuel DeLanda, A Thousand Years of Non-Linear History, Zone Books(New York), 1997. See also Ludwig Von Bertalanffy, General Systems Theory,General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, GeorgeBraziller (New York), 1969, as a precursor to an integrated organisationalschema overlaying many disciplines, most notably with regards to the effectson morphology within mathematics and biology.4.Ibid.5. This materialist philosophy been articulated through a philosophicaltrajectory that includes Spinoza, Deleuze and DeLanda among others6. Duncan J Watts and Steven H Strogatz, ‘Collective dynamics of “smallworld”networks’, Nature, Vol 393, 4 June 1998, p 440.7. Ibid.8. See Christian Von Bayer, Information: The New Language of Science,Harvard University Press (Cambridge, MA), 2003.9. A qubit is a quantum unit of information – ‘it is a concept not a thing. Wherea bit can have the value of zero or one, a qubit is defined as a quantumsuperposition of zero a n d o n e .’ From Christian Von Bayer, Information: The NewLanguage of Science, Harvard University Press (Cambridge, MA), 2003, pp 18 3 – 4 .10. Peter Lyman and Hal Varian, ‘How much information 2003?’, sims,University of California, Berkeley, c 2004, /projects/how-much-info-2003/.11. Peter Biddle, Paul England, Marcus Peinado and Bryan Willman, ‘TheDarknet and the Future of Content Distribution’, Microsoft Corporation, Briefly, the deep net holds file locations on the public World Wide Web thatare inaccessible to conventional search engines, and the dark internet is anetwork of computers inaccessible to the World Wide Web. According to onestudy the amount of information contained in the deep net is 550 timesgreater than the surface net, in the words of the Microsoft researchers whocoined the phrase.13. BitTorrent is a peer-to-peer file transfer protocol created by Bram Cohenin 2001. For more on BitTorrent see The next-generation Internet, reported widely as Web 2.0, will feature contextsensitiveinformation capabilities and predictive information through linkingmany different sources of information based on user histories and profiles.15. ‘RIP Consumer, 190 0 – 199 9’; http://www. s h i r k y. c o m / w r i t i n g s / c o n s u m e r. h t m l .16. Ibid.17. Biddle, England, Peinado and Willman, op cit.18. Albert-László Barabási, Linked: The New Science of Networks, PerseusPublishing (Cambridge, MA), 2002.19. Marshall McLuhan, ‘The relation of Environment to Anti-Environment, inEric McLuhan and W Terrence Gordon (eds), Marshall McLuhan, the Unboundproject (04), Ginko Press (Corte Madera, CA), 2005, p 6.20. See 2002 Milcom Proceedings, ‘Global Information Grid – EnablingTransformation Through 21st-Century Communications’, copyright 2002, IEEE(IEEE Copyrights manager, NJ) 2002.21. C4ISR: command, control, communications, computers, intelligence,surveillance and reconnaissance.22. Glenn Rolader, John Rogers and Jad Batteh, ‘Self-healing minefields’, inRaja Surech (ed), Battlespace Digitization and Network-Centric Systems IV,Proceedings of SPIE, Vol 5441, SPIE (Bellingham, WA), 2004.23. John C Sciortino, Jr, James F Smith III, Behzad Kamgar-Parsi and CDRRandall Franciose, ‘Implementation of battlespace agents for network-centricelectronic warfare’, in Raja Suresh (ed), Battlespace Digitization and Network-Centric Warfare, Proceedings of SPIE Vol 4396, 2001.24. Alan Boyle, ‘Measuring the Web’s “diameter”’, ‘The ecology of ideas’ is elegantly discussed as a social/culturalphenomena by Pierre Lévy in ‘Towards a language of collective intelligence’, inChristine Schopf and Gerfried Stocker (eds), Code: The Language of OurTime, Hatje Cantz (Ostfildern, Germany), 2003.26. François Jacob, The Logic of Life: A History of Heredity, Vintage Books(New York), 1973.27. From R Polk Wagner, ‘Information wants to be free: Intellectual Propertyand the mythologies of control’, Columbia Law Review, Vol 103: 995, p 999.( Though it has clearlytaken on a life of its own, most people attribute the origins of the phrase toStewart Brand: see Stewart Brand, The Media Lab: Inventing the Future atMIT, Penguin, reprint edition, 1988.95

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines