DAO, Centralized control and other fishing nets.

1. what the activity is? 

The activity will be a workshop starting with a guest lecture.   

The lecture will present Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO) by the gallery furtherfeild; an organization based in London (the lecture will be performed via video link). A DOA is an example of an administration program that runs autonomously via code and requires no human input.  

The workshop will consider what it means to have an organization with no central point of human control and to rethink existing models of power/governance. The lecture will frame the workshop by giving examples of what a DAO means and the possibilities for the arts. Recent technologies have enabled the possibility of new structural models and the widespread use of technology makes it accessible to many. In the art world, the primary structures are still based on centralized decision-making in post-colonial systems. These systems are voting and deciding who receives art funding. A more democratic grant structure could enable more access to different views on the value and artistic quality. 

 After the lecture, the workshop participants will be grouped then asked to work together to produce new structures and alternative models (the exact framework is still to be decided however it will be a ‘real world’ situation in a hypothetical model). In the workshop, the participants will be given parameters to create their own conceptual DAO. The hope is to make this open creative and fun exercise.  

In addition, the workshop has the potential to help the ARC organization become less reliant on institutional help. 

2. how it is connected with the arc ideals? 

The lecture and workshop are connected to technology and a way of accepting and rethinking an alternative system to a centralized (colonial) structure. The depth of colonialist attitude is so Ingrande in social economic and political structures it is hard to see out of the snow globe. There is a focus on looking back on colonial topics however we are products of this past and should look to learn from it to try and make models in the future that do not have the repetitive power centralizations. Another repetitive flaw of alternative thinking is to have certainty in the conviction of a ‘right’ way or new way which is better. I would argue there are only models, and all models are wrong until they are less wrong than the next one, uncertainty is important. 

 The .com boom of the 90’s and the birth of the internet was an optimistic time enabling free information and a way for information to be accessed globally. However, over time larger monopolies of tech giants have slowly invaded the space creating a single port of access for information that can be influenced and subverted. The cypherpunk movement and the birth of blockchain technology is a way of decoupling the individual from the central power. The DOA offers an alternative way of thinking and approaching such problems of a monopoly and centralized power structures.  

 The physical space and the virtual space are domains that can be taken by a monopoly that harness the biggest influence. In the physical colonial examples of religious or ethical justifications of such colonial endeavor mask a profiteering incentive. As I look at the digital age and mental space, I am reminded of Google’s company motto ‘don’t be evil’ suggesting that google is not evil and that it knows what evil is. It is ironic as they also can influence and define what Evil now is through their platform. The benefit of DOA is that it gives an alternative to the monopoly. If there was a motto in a decentral Paradyme, it should read ‘can’t do evil’ as no one person/group will ever have enough power to have control it over it.