The Art of Disrupting Business
CC Attribution - ShareAlike 3.0 Germany:
You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor and the work or content is shared also in adapted form only under the conditions of this
Bazzichelli, Tatiana
Tatiana Bazzichelli describes the concept of "disruptive business" as an art practice, Her analysis becomes an opportunity to imagine new possible routes of social and political action. Distributed, autonomous and decentralised networking practices of disruption become a means for rethinking oppositional hacktivist and artistic strategies within the framework of art and business.
 Hello everybody, I think I will put this headphone because there is a bit of interference with the other room. So it's a nice experiment for me because I never have spoken in this way but it's kind of interesting, we will have kind of telepathic connection one with each other and I hope you can hear me well and of course I hope also that we will have a great interaction at the end of my talk because I really, I mean for me it's really important to know also your point of view and also what you think about all these subjects. So first of all I would like to introduce myself, of course I've been already slightly, deeply introduced by the Republic team that actually I thanks for this invitation and I would like to say that I am a kind of hybrid person because I'm coming from different backgrounds and from one side I've been working as part of the hacker community in Italy and also being interested in discovering it in Berlin since 10 years and I've been down these bots working as a curator but also as a researcher. But at the same time for me being a researcher or a curator had always a specific meaning and this meaning was to try to investigate critically media practices and see in which way they could be connected at the same time with art but also social politics and of course when I speak about politics I'm not speaking about the usual party politics. This is a tradition that we bring along with us coming from Italy but politics for us means also to have an attitude connected to experiencing society and culture critically. And so this is a bit what's been accompanying me in all these years and I've been recently published two books, one book is called Disrupting Business that have been co-edited together with Jeff Cox and another book is called Network Disruption and this is a bit the book that I'm going to speak and present today and also something that you will freely download hopefully from the internet if you find this interesting. So I will go on by briefly tell you that this is the main scheme I'm referring to and we will go back to this later. I'm just briefly explaining that I'm not somebody that is coming from a business school so I'm not a business person but I'm interested in understanding what the business concept mean applied to art and culture and so I am referring specifically to the concept of disruption in Novation that has been developed by Clayton Christensen of the Harvard Business School in the 90s and this concept meant to deal with the process that disrupts the markets in an expected way and also to generate a product that the market does not expect and this concept is something that I'm bringing directly to what I refer with art and hacking so we will go back to this kind of scheme after the talk and so I start from the beginning this is me in 1999 when I was attending a hack meeting in Italy, this was really a great time in which we believed a lot about cyber utopias, the idea of the computer to the people and also fighting to think about technology as a tool to empowering society and politics and so in Italy this is really long tradition that of course comes also way before as a form of criticism related to art and culture and politics but in the 90s we started really to develop something that was related to cyberpunk utopias and also to the idea of cyber rights as a tool for freedom but then what's happened? In 2001 maybe some of you have experienced what I also experienced that was many demonstrations that happened from 2001 starting in 1999 with Seattle demonstration related to the fight against power and politics in the G8 context and this is an image that come from the G-Noir G8 in 2001 and unfortunately I have to say that for me this has been really critical experience even if I was not in G-Noir as many people that actually got really the worst I was in Florence running with some people of the Strano network collective and independent radio and we were connecting directly with Radio Gap that was the radio that was reporting what was happening and so I assisted as many people live when the police is looked inside the media center and was actually something that was from one side really making the movement reflect what are we actually doing is really these the right parts we are taking because the idea was really to be frontal have an antagonistic approach and trying also to fight this enemy trying to assault the red zone and these kind of things and to be sincere for me this is really speaking personally was a sort of a failure because at the end we end up doing the game of the police and so I was really wondering is this the right strategy that actually we should bring along or maybe there are different strategy that we could reflect upon and so from one side I think the G-Noir 2001 was a big blow for the movement but was also a starting point because there were many other groups that started independently after that time and also many other collectives that really resourced what they were doing and my special my particular experience here I think the pink color is not so strong but has been trying to reflect on different kind of practices and I found the kind of new hope in the pink and the queer movements trying to reflect on strategy that are not just confrontational and oppositional but strategies that are really trying to be transversal and fluid and also somehow to disrupt the system from within trying really to work with identity in a way that is critical and also questioning what is identity questioning the dialectic as a political struggle and also this is not something completely new because in Italy there has been a long tradition related to this kind of attitude this kind of practice and so I always really like to bring in the context I am the image of Luther Blissett I don't know if you are really familiar with that but Luther Blissett has been a multiple name that people were starting to adopt around middle of the 90s and the idea was that everybody could become Luther Blissett this image that is the portrait of Luther Blissett was basically creating by morphing different other image and so is a fictional identity is somebody that is that people could appropriate and also embody to try to somehow disrupt the system from within and what many people were trying to do was really to apply the idea of fake plagiarism on also disruption inside the media system because often Luther Blissett was creating some pranks that were really directly going to interfere with what journalists were doing what politician were doing really try to demonstrate that actually media are a construction and if you understand that if you understand the logic of them then you can really try to somehow discern the logic also coming back to kind of avant-garde perspective and at the same time there is also another part of history that I like to quote here because also Luther Blissett has not been the first there has been also other example before like the new East network and the research project that started in 1979 in Canada in Montreal and then also spread all over Europe for example also here in Berlin there are been many new East really active and the new is more was also something that was referring to the idea of creating a multiple identity and this was Monte Cancin and at the same time going in US there have been another really interesting disruptive if you want movement or basic or better parody religion that was the church of the sub genius and so I have here also another icon that was familiar for many at the end of the 70 during the 80s that is Bob Dobbs that is there also an icon representing a way to disrupt the system and in this case also through rituals and as I say a parody religion and so I'm still back a bit on history and we could say that also many of these projects were interpreting networking as a collective participation that was coming from grassroots movements and I often show this image that is a image created by the postal artist Victor Baroni the name is organic tree made in 1992 and he was ready speaking about the idea of networking as a practice that was involving many postal artists around the world they were exchanging materials postcards stamps and many other do it yourself projects and this kind of tradition is also coming directly from other avant-garde like fluksus the situation is the future is the visual poetry but in that time in the 90s many people trying to create networking by using the media that's at that time where really used as a tool of expression and also do it yourself and so for example we have photocopiers computer phone fax video cassettes I mean I'm sure you remember that and the happened then something else that I will define my second big blow that is the coming of web tool and I explained it why because from one side web to 0 in 2004 change completely the idea of referring to networking I mean many of you know and also there's been a really positive outcome of that because much more people know know how to deal with networking what networking is and we are we are all much more connected but at the same time also we have to say that is a completely different idea of social networking in respect of what we were actually thinking about in the past and is an idea of social networking that is pretty sense central eyes because of course is mainly controlled by different companies and so I mean for some of what you would be something great for other would be actually something to question especially now trying to reflect on the discourse of surveillance and also privacy I think already now we are experiencing something that actually many people coming from the hacker culture already knew long time ago so has been not really a surprise for people active in the hacker culture to know that you are constantly surveil and so what did I do I try to investigate also these I mean try to understand where is actually coming from this idea of networking really connected with business and the idea also of a centralization of network practices and in which way we can really understand the networking as a disruptive business and so I went to San Francisco and to Silicon Valley I was doing a visiting scholarship at Stanford for some months and I met some many interesting people there that's actually told me that's I mean this idea of you know hacking completely disconnected from business is a bit of a new topia that's many European people have but is absolutely not what so many people in US think when for example a lot of history of hacking has been completely interweave in with the one of business if we think how the Silicon Valley develop even as the first BBS develop and so if you remember this the history of the homebrew computer club for example so I met also Fred Turner there that's we had a lot of interesting conversation related to the shift between counterculture and cyber culture in California and so he actually explained me that's we are speaking more about a layering here is not an opposition but is a layer and that means that many people are actually doing things that are not are contradicting themselves but they do at the same time and the burning man is really an example of that I don't know if you ever been there is really big gathering of people once a year during August in the desert of Nevada and so this for me has been a really interesting example because Fred was connected the burning man with Google in in his speech really reflecting on the fact that's a gathering like that's is actually really functional today to the ethos of Silicon Valley because there are many companies going there is actually a big business because you know you have to pay a kind of high tickets that are like 50,000 people even more now that go and each of them pay more than $100 tickets and so you can imagine that is a big business of course there is a lot infrastructure but at the same time you know is also something that grew exponentially from the first experience that were pretty disruptive like the cacophony society or the suicide club that are being really the one establishing a bit the idea of burning man and so what the Fred was telling me by looking at burning man actually is an example that now business is really working with disruption because from one side is empowering a community but from the other is completely you know creating a revenue from that and so in that sense a burning man is a clear example also I would say many people working at Google go there also many people working at the Silicon Valley because it's a moment of freedom that people can experience but also is a big moment of networking for Silicon Valley companies so I developed something going back to my scheme here that's I call the art of disrupting business and so I say maybe we should change the structure we should also change the political perspective because to be antagonistic oppositional for me doesn't work anymore because we have been already understood that's a business are as appropriated a lot rhetoric that was really pretty used by hackers in the 90s and so instead of being confrontational that is actually I think is something you just lose your battle is better is there to be disruption and what I'm speaking about is a model in which from one side the artist are trying to disrupt business by working on the system from between and at the same time also business is creating disruption by creating also innovation so this is my disruptive feedback loop that's I'm going also to explain now with the difference example and involves dire directly in different layers artists hacker activists entrepreneurs and also networkers so one example that's also I like to bring is of course Napster and I think Napster has been a great example of a disruptive innovation because in 1999 really introduce the idea of file sharing in a way that becomes kind of massive because the people really trying to interpret the music industry in a different way so I think that's a Napster that was also really accepted a lot from the hacker community at the beginning I think is really showing how this layer of perturbance is actually working and then I don't know if Stallman would be happy that I say that but I think also GNU Linux as an operative system has been really also disruptive technology because introduce in the market completely something that the market didn't expect and really disrupt what's in that time was the windows and Apple business but how do we connect these with the artistic practices and in my book I'm trying to analyze different concept and also different case studies that are all working with idea of disruption so from one side they are disrupting the business because they are interfering with that and from the other I'm actually analyzing on project that create business by making disruption and so I can also give you specific example then if you are interested you can easily download my book from the internet but two example that I always like to bring are the Sepuku artistic project and also Anna Damolo so I start first with Sepuku. Sepuku was developed by the Italian collective Le Lien's Invisible especially<|it|><|translate|><|it|><|translate|><|it|><|translate|><|it|><|translate|><|it|><|translate|>Pre emerges we've got Sepuku And their idea was really to try to understand how Facebook works and especially what is behind the code when you create your login inside the system. And they were really working on this tension between the open and closed nature of social media and also trying to work on this unpredictable consequence that are generated by disruptive use of it. So basically by doing your login, you are going to inside the seppuku and you could create your virtual suicide. So seppuku is actually a Japanese virtual suicide, actually physical suicide. That means you have to cut your belly and has been also used by the Luther Brissett project in 1999 when they declared the ends of the project. So they took again this kind of practice and they say we should all create our suicide in Facebook and this become really viral. So there were many people that were doing that and was interesting because they were really using and appropriating the code of the login of Facebook. But at the same time when you were committed your suicide, basically you were canceling yourself from Facebook and also you were receiving a high score, more suicide of people you were managing to create that were following you. And the question was really I'm actually really able to live my virtual world with Facebook. And at the end of course was kind of easy way of trying to reflect on that in the sense that I think also this was intelligent from their side. Because they say okay you can create your seppuku but then if you want to go back you know you can, you just do login again, you are back in Facebook. So for them was not really the point of disrupting completely Facebook but they wanted to make people reflect on what to use Facebook means. And also what means to create friendship in Facebook, how you can use the code of Facebook. And of course they received from Facebook a cease and desist letter and the things went on for kind of long time. Another example that I like to bring you is the Anna Damolo project and they were also coming from Italy and working especially in that time like 2008-2009. And basically Anna Damolo is the acronym of on the anomala that in English could be translated with anomalous wave. And was a movement of different students that were protesting against cuts of education, research. That's actually was a phenomenon that is still happening but became really massified during that time. There were a lot of protests not only in Italy but also around Europe and the world. And so they created somebody that was a fictional identity, this Anna Damolo that you can see on the screen. Anna Damolo also is trying to reflect on what means the idea of creating a virtual character that could be used to become viral. That could be appropriated by people not refusing the fact of being Facebook but really trying to understand how Facebook works and trying to turn it to your own advantage. So they created something that was appropriated by a lot of students. We had both the graphic logo of Anna Damolo and also the different morphing image that created a real person that people use to turn back their profile of Facebook into Anna Damolo. And people were claiming Anna Damolo is the new Minister of Education, University and Research and we are occupying the ministry at the moment. And so they created also the phasement of the website and were allowing people to leave different messages by using a telephone line that they also build up. And from these different messages of the experience of the people being Anna Damolo, they created also a book that was published in 2009. So why am I speaking about that? Because I think that all these projects really are explaining as something kind of specific. So that's possible to disrupt system from the inside, especially trying to look for the holes and the vulnerability of these systems. So I'm here having a quote of a really interesting book from Canadian researcher Richard Day that wrote this book named Gramsci is Dead. And he's writing, there will be always holes even when there are no longer any margins. And I think that is a bit the form of disrupting these and I'm speaking about really trying to reflect what are actually the holes that we could infiltrate. And in which sense, what are the different experience and intervention that we could imagine by really understanding our technology work by understanding what is the code behind the interface. So when anonymous came, I was of course really happy because I think that this was exactly showing that certain, I don't know if people were really familiar with Luther Blissett or Monty Cansin and the Neoism. But for me, somehow these different entity that you cannot even call a movement was replicating some of these strategies by really reflecting on the vulnerability of system and also the discourse of anonymity. That was really important aspect of these previous practices that I told you. And then, so the question for me becomes, is really important to be effective in politics, in culture and also in the media struggle. And I think that maybe we should also question what is the effectiveness dialectic because I don't think this works anymore and this makes us really an easy target. And I think we learn from Luther Blissett, from Neoism and they all were saying it's really hard to see any truth. And by questioning what is the truth, then you had to really try to create new form of strategies that could disrupt the system. And I'm also bringing you another example. This is a project that I was creating at Transmediale 2013 and has been developed by the Telecom Unistan Collective by Ramla Borberlin and also by a huge network of postal artists. This was called Octo P71, was a pneumatic system that we created by connecting different stations inside the house, the culture and the wealth. It was something that the Telecom Unistan also called the official miscommunication platform of Transmediale 2013 by following their idea of miscommunication. And I think in this idea of miscommunication, in the fact that you can really question a system from the inside but also being playful and ironic, there is also the answer I was looking for. And this specific project, maybe I just described you briefly, was something like a reflection of a social network system, especially the idea was that there was a corporation, Octo, that was trying to imagine a worldwide pneumatic post system that was connecting different households and we were doing like the beta testing at Transmediale by connecting the different rooms of the house, the culture and the wealth. And it was really a centralized system because there was a main station and different periphyric stations and you could exchange the capsules that were traveling inside the pipes by really administrating this station. But it was also really, if you want, a co-existent of opposition project because it was from one side dealing with closeness of system from one side with openness. And the idea of openness was related to the presence of the male artist because Vittorio Baroni, this postal artist that I mentioned before, collected a lot of presence of many postal artists around the world that actually sent to us a capsule and this capsule that could travel around inside the pipes could be open and inside there were some instructions that the people, the visitor could perform. So it was also an interesting interpretation of how to perform something that is traveling inside the closed system. And I was also really happy when the last Chaos Computer Club, there were some people that went on with this project and they created a new version of that that was completely open, distributed and also based on the do-it-yourself idea that they call side and stress. Probably if you have been at the CCC Congress you have seen that. So I would like to finally to conclude with two examples. I mean one example that also I think is really interesting in this kind of discussion on how to learn to be pervasive and how to understand that reality is made of different layers is the work of Trevor Paglin. And we have been collaborating recently in a panel of Tras Mediale that I was creating together with Jacoble Baum and also Laura Poitras. And specifically in their discourse of art as evidence and also in the discourse of the photos that Trevor does of drones, there is the idea that actually art could become a tool for evidence but at the same time reality is not something that you just can't see from one perspective. But there are really many perspectives you can work with. And this is actually a fault of drones and you don't see them but they are there. And that is why I think the example of Trevor is really along this line because he is really showing you that maybe what you can do is try to reflect on the unpredictability of reality and also on the fact that there are different layers of interpretation and these layers of interpretation are not so far away from you. You know they are on the sky and if you have different eyes you can actually see them. So how is it possible to disrupt the system from within by understanding really how the system works, how you can see what is around us with different eyes and also understanding that art could be a form of evidence. So this is my new project that I just tell you briefly because I mean I just launching it now is a disruption network lab and I'm planning to be active in the next months hopefully years at the Y Art House in Berlin. And I'm reflecting on really how to create a curatorial program but also a hub of research and practice related to the idea of disruption that I'm speaking about how to create a co-existent of opposition and how actually to invite people that are really questioning the truth because I think that's a you know truth is something that could be see from really different angles and there is always somebody that has actually more resources to force the truth on you. This is also something Dimitri Klein always says by speaking on a venture communism and so maybe instead of really trying to have a truth that is more truth of the truth of who people that have power you should really question what the truth is and question by understanding how to create different layer of interpretation. So I just conclude by saying that if you are interested in this subject you can go to that website where there are my different books and you can download them and enjoy and thanks a lot and also I hope you have a really interesting questions. Yeah. Thank you Tatiana. Are there any questions in the room. Don't be shy. Yes. Hi thank you for your talk. You said that art alters businesses by interfering with them. Can you can you just specify this a little bit more is it is it like entering the DNA of businesses and how do businesses react to them I mean. I think when I speak about that as I say I'm referring to the idea of disruptive innovation. So the idea of introducing in the market something that the market doesn't expect. And if you go back on the history of art especially the avant-garde. This is exactly the strategy that the avant-garde were making really working with the unexpected with the unpredictable and try to disrupt the system from within. I think also we had had a really great example during these days with the keynotes opening of the yes man because I think since many years now because they have been really active in the net art scene. They have been questioning the discourse of business by interfering with it. I really understand how it works. I mean they know how to infiltrate because they studied the logic of it. And at the same time they understand how to work with your identity with your perception of yourself in trying to enter the business. So it's more like her strategy. You know I'm not. I have not a recipe for the successful business here because as I say I'm not a business person but I think that business especially today really show how to be pervasive. And you know I think even the social networks companies and web to is really showing us how to do that. You mean trying to use something that is disrupting a market that we know. I also think that business has been dying since down doing since many years if you think about you know the advertisements agency. There have been a constant recycle of a reappropriation also of the so-called counterculture in the 60s. And so my point of view is you know this is nothing new. The appropriation is something that always happen. But business change because now is became really flexible pervasive and is also actually working a lot with openness to yourself. Social networking. So I'm telling the people doesn't make sense anymore just to be antagonistic because you know there have been somebody that have been faster than us. I think actually should do the other way around trying to appropriate business. So it's not a matter of language. For example when I was speaking with a lot of activists at the beginning they really didn't like my work. You know because I was coming from a tradition of more antagonistic practices and they didn't like I use the word business. I say why you have to use the word business to speak about radical artistic practices. I think that's why I like this word. And then I was saying actually that is why I'm using it because I think that we should start also appropriating the language that we are dealing with. And so actually what is business. And if you go into the etymology of the the world then you see that actually business has a really different connotation because business means being busy being somebody that is constantly trying to achieve something. And that has to do with anxiety with really trying to do something all the time. So I was not immediately something to do with economy. And so I think OK maybe we can also start to reflect on this specific word. And then with Jeff Cox with published this anthology they are really interesting contribution like for example Franco Berardi before saying I think I mean he really demonstrating how nasty could be the world business if you really bring it on yourself and trying to imagine that actually we are now working all the time because also when we use a social medium we are working you know because there is somebody that is making a profit from our relationship. So there are really a lot of layers of interpretation. And I'm also coming from more kind of situationalistic approach in which I think that's not only media but also language is not neutral. So and I think business really taught us that because all the at the first web to all convention I went I remember there was one in 2004 year in Berlin and also there was Timora I laid I were really speaking about hacker culture. That was like what is possible. I mean for me was really something that was coming from another perspective because I was coming from Italy you know and we always say that hacking was something else. So that is why I say wait a second maybe have to start going back here and understanding that these kind of these courses made of different layers and then trying to bring it back to the community and coming from and also trying to see if there could be people that could be inspired by this way of seeing the reality you know but there is also not something that I invented. There is really as I say a long tradition of artistic practices that are dealing with that I just I am just advocating that there will be even more because I think that the idea of the truth as a unique whom a holistic concept is actually really dangerous because you could be really attacked by somebody that claim that has a bigger truth than yours and more powerful and there is always somebody that is more powerful than you. So I think instead of being in this dialectic maybe it's better to go outside of that and trying to enter the system of what you're trying to criticize from the inside. Any other questions or additions inspirations. Yeah thank you for the talk. I was I was wondering if you feel that this strategy is more likely to be adopted in certain cultures. Or if you feel it's like a very you know if some cultures and scenes are more open to it like geographically. I don't know because I mean in my research I was really trying to map different perspective. And then of course there was a limit because I could not investigate. You know too much and of course I'm missing a lot of prospecting coming more from Asia other country the south. But I would say that there is a really interesting dialectic between like the history of net culture in Europe and what it was in US. But still these things are speaking. You know because I think they actually feed each other. And I was also having an interesting conversation with Jacob about that because he was the one that really suggests me the idea of the mutual feedback loop when in 2009 he was working. I mean it was part of the noise bridge collective of San Francisco. And he was told me that actually you know a lot of hacker space is not a noise bridge. And I think it was very particular because it was more coming from kind of European tradition of you know anarchism and also politics were actually in US supported by Microsoft Google. I thought wow how is possible hackers are actually happy to get money from Microsoft and Google. Actually I'm not here in this convention support by Microsoft. So I don't know. But you know I think that maybe we should go so beyond this way of thinking because maybe it doesn't matter anymore. You know what they were telling me was at least in this discussion. You know I mean many hackers space is especially one in Mountain View that's you know I don't know if still existing probably yes it's called hacker dodge. They were telling me but we don't have no problem to get this money. At least we can also be free to do what we want. So there is a really different perspective there inside. I would say in a car space in Italy at least one coming from more political tradition would have always refused to have money from Microsoft Google. But personally I think that this way of antagonistic perspective doesn't bring anywhere. So I think that instead we should more work on the interferences of these different cultures. And that is why I'm questioning what is business disruption and actually seeing as I say paradoxically that we should learn from business in a way can be really effective and pervasive. Yeah thank you again Tatiana for this detailed input again. Take the chance to ask or to give us some more ideas about hacktivism, hacker culture. Thank you very much for your speech was really interesting. What I miss is who is the enemy. I assume you don't accept the word enemy because you're talking about disruption but what is then the final goal. Who take advantage from this disruption and who is affected by it. No as I say I don't think we should think about in terms of enemy anymore because this is again a way of working with politics and culture and technology that is completely dialectic. And I think this form of antagonism I hope I demonstrate doesn't work anymore nowadays. And so I don't know actually who could benefit of these. I can see that there are many artists that's already using the idea of disruption. And it's actually something that's really proper of the hacker ethic because all the hackers are been always working by trying to disrupt the system from within trying to opening up the system trying to understand what is inside. I mean the cost the so called hands on prospective of hacker culture. So you know from one side is not something new is just something that I think maybe we should have knowledge and trying to also experience directly by embodying it. And so is a and is a from one side an artistic input that I'm giving. But from the other side I can also tell you that a lot of business company are actually working with disruption already because is is a concept that comes from business is really. I mean the basic of how many advertisement agency work also start ups. So I also don't think I'm saying something new for many companies that are here and has been also recently invited in Italy last year from to actually speak with people that are doing business. I mean I was invited from the Omnicon media group that is an advertisement company that is worldwide and there is a section of it in Italy. And they were really interested in these things. They told me I really want to know what you think about business disruption. Can you tell us your point of view because we work on disruption by you know referring to products. In fact the companies that were there where you know there was the Barilla the clinic. I mean Renault really companies that are selling product and initially I was wondering OK I don't know if what I'm actually bringing there is something that's. They will be really interested. But then by having a dialogue with them I understood that it was the case because I could also see what was on the other side of the coin and also have a really interesting dialogue with people that are doing something coming from a different perspective. But still we are speaking about similar concept. So in that sense I say we should work by bringing oppositions together and trying to highlight co-existence of oppositions. And then in that sense I think you know of course then you decide what is your enemy is a more personal interpretation of that. But I think that at the same time is also something that's you know is more related to your specific background. But in the more bigger picture that I'm presenting I'm also thinking that we should go beyond this antagonistic structure of power because I think was already demonstrated in many situations that then at the end you end up doing the game of the people you want to oppose. So some other question or we go to get a coffee. OK if there aren't any further questions I would like to thank you Tatiana again for her very inspiring talk. Thank you for.
 Hello everybody, I think I will put this headphone because there is a bit of interference  with the other room.  So it's a nice experiment for me because I never have spoken in this way but it's kind  of interesting, we will have kind of telepathic connection one with each other and I hope  you can hear me well and of course I hope also that we will have a great interaction  at the end of my talk because I really, I mean for me it's really important to know  also your point of view and also what you think about all these subjects.  So first of all I would like to introduce myself, of course I've been already slightly,  deeply introduced by the Republic team that actually I thanks for this invitation and  I would like to say that I am a kind of hybrid person because I'm coming from different  backgrounds and from one side I've been working as part of the hacker community in Italy  and also being interested in discovering it in Berlin since 10 years and I've been down  these bots working as a curator but also as a researcher.  But at the same time for me being a researcher or a curator had always a specific meaning  and this meaning was to try to investigate critically media practices and see in which  way they could be connected at the same time with art but also social politics and of course  when I speak about politics I'm not speaking about the usual party politics.  This is a tradition that we bring along with us coming from Italy but politics for us means  also to have an attitude connected to experiencing society and culture critically.  And so this is a bit what's been accompanying me in all these years and I've been recently  published two books, one book is called Disrupting Business that have been co-edited together  with Jeff Cox and another book is called Network Disruption and this is a bit the book that  I'm going to speak and present today and also something that you will freely download  hopefully from the internet if you find this interesting.  So I will go on by briefly tell you that this is the main scheme I'm referring to and we  will go back to this later.  I'm just briefly explaining that I'm not somebody that is coming from a business school so I'm  not a business person but I'm interested in understanding what the business concept mean  applied to art and culture and so I am referring specifically to the concept of disruption  in Novation that has been developed by Clayton Christensen of the Harvard Business School  in the 90s and this concept meant to deal with the process that disrupts the markets  in an expected way and also to generate a product that the market does not expect and  this concept is something that I'm bringing directly to what I refer with art and hacking  so we will go back to this kind of scheme after the talk and so I start from the beginning  this is me in 1999 when I was attending a hack meeting in Italy, this was really a great  time in which we believed a lot about cyber utopias, the idea of the computer to the people  and also fighting to think about technology as a tool to empowering society and politics  and so in Italy this is really long tradition that of course comes also way before as a  form of criticism related to art and culture and politics but in the 90s we started really  to develop something that was related to cyberpunk utopias and also to the idea of cyber rights  as a tool for freedom but then what's happened?  In 2001 maybe some of you have experienced what I also experienced that was many demonstrations  that happened from 2001 starting in 1999 with Seattle demonstration related to the fight  against power and politics in the G8 context and this is an image that come from the G-Noir  G8 in 2001 and unfortunately I have to say that for me this has been really critical  experience even if I was not in G-Noir as many people that actually got really the worst  I was in Florence running with some people of the Strano network collective and independent  radio and we were connecting directly with Radio Gap that was the radio that was reporting  what was happening and so I assisted as many people live when the police is looked inside  the media center and was actually something that was from one side really making the movement  reflect what are we actually doing is really these the right parts we are taking because  the idea was really to be frontal have an antagonistic approach and trying also to fight  this enemy trying to assault the red zone and these kind of things and to be sincere  for me this is really speaking personally was a sort of a failure because at the end  we end up doing the game of the police and so I was really wondering is this the right  strategy that actually we should bring along or maybe there are different strategy that  we could reflect upon and so from one side I think the G-Noir 2001 was a big blow for  the movement but was also a starting point because there were many other groups that  started independently after that time and also many other collectives that really resourced  what they were doing and my special my particular experience here I think the pink color is not  so strong but has been trying to reflect on different kind of practices and I found the  kind of new hope in the pink and the queer movements trying to reflect on strategy that  are not just confrontational and oppositional but strategies that are really trying to be  transversal and fluid and also somehow to disrupt the system from within trying really  to work with identity in a way that is critical and also questioning what is identity questioning  the dialectic as a political struggle and also this is not something completely new  because in Italy there has been a long tradition related to this kind of attitude this kind  of practice and so I always really like to bring in the context I am the image of Luther  Blissett I don't know if you are really familiar with that but Luther Blissett has been a  multiple name that people were starting to adopt around middle of the 90s and the idea  was that everybody could become Luther Blissett this image that is the portrait of Luther  Blissett was basically creating by morphing different other image and so is a fictional  identity is somebody that is that people could appropriate and also embody to try to somehow  disrupt the system from within and what many people were trying to do was really to apply  the idea of fake plagiarism on also disruption inside the media system because often Luther  Blissett was creating some pranks that were really directly going to interfere with what  journalists were doing what politician were doing really try to demonstrate that actually  media are a construction and if you understand that if you understand the logic of them then  you can really try to somehow discern the logic also coming back to kind of avant-garde  perspective and at the same time there is also another part of history that I like to  quote here because also Luther Blissett has not been the first there has been also other  example before like the new East network and the research project that started in 1979  in Canada in Montreal and then also spread all over Europe for example also here in Berlin  there are been many new East really active and the new is more was also something that  was referring to the idea of creating a multiple identity and this was Monte Cancin and at  the same time going in US there have been another really interesting disruptive if you  want movement or basic or better parody religion that was the church of the sub genius and  so I have here also another icon that was familiar for many at the end of the 70 during  the 80s that is Bob Dobbs that is there also an icon representing a way to disrupt the  system and in this case also through rituals and as I say a parody religion and so I'm  still back a bit on history and we could say that also many of these projects were interpreting  networking as a collective participation that was coming from grassroots movements and I  often show this image that is a image created by the postal artist Victor Baroni the name  is organic tree made in 1992 and he was ready speaking about the idea of networking as a  practice that was involving many postal artists around the world they were exchanging materials  postcards stamps and many other do it yourself projects and this kind of tradition is also  coming directly from other avant-garde like fluksus the situation is the future is the  visual poetry but in that time in the 90s many people trying to create networking by  using the media that's at that time where really used as a tool of expression and also  do it yourself and so for example we have photocopiers computer phone fax video cassettes  I mean I'm sure you remember that and the happened then something else that I will define my  second big blow that is the coming of web tool and I explained it why because from one side  web to 0 in 2004 change completely the idea of referring to networking I mean many of  you know and also there's been a really positive outcome of that because much more people know  know how to deal with networking what networking is and we are we are all much more connected  but at the same time also we have to say that is a completely different idea of social networking  in respect of what we were actually thinking about in the past and is an idea of social  networking that is pretty sense central eyes because of course is mainly controlled by  different companies and so I mean for some of what you would be something great for other  would be actually something to question especially now trying to reflect on the discourse of  surveillance and also privacy I think already now we are experiencing something that actually  many people coming from the hacker culture already knew long time ago so has been not  really a surprise for people active in the hacker culture to know that you are constantly  surveil and so what did I do I try to investigate also these I mean try to understand where  is actually coming from this idea of networking really connected with business and the idea  also of a centralization of network practices and in which way we can really understand  the networking as a disruptive business and so I went to San Francisco and to Silicon  Valley I was doing a visiting scholarship at Stanford for some months and I met some  many interesting people there that's actually told me that's I mean this idea of you know  hacking completely disconnected from business is a bit of a new topia that's many European  people have but is absolutely not what so many people in US think when for example a  lot of history of hacking has been completely interweave in with the one of business if  we think how the Silicon Valley develop even as the first BBS develop and so if you remember  this the history of the homebrew computer club for example so I met also Fred Turner  there that's we had a lot of interesting conversation related to the shift between counterculture  and cyber culture in California and so he actually explained me that's we are speaking  more about a layering here is not an opposition but is a layer and that means that many people  are actually doing things that are not are contradicting themselves but they do at the  same time and the burning man is really an example of that I don't know if you ever been  there is really big gathering of people once a year during August in the desert of Nevada  and so this for me has been a really interesting example because Fred was connected the burning  man with Google in in his speech really reflecting on the fact that's a gathering like that's  is actually really functional today to the ethos of Silicon Valley because there are  many companies going there is actually a big business because you know you have to pay  a kind of high tickets that are like 50,000 people even more now that go and each of them  pay more than $100 tickets and so you can imagine that is a big business of course there is  a lot infrastructure but at the same time you know is also something that grew exponentially  from the first experience that were pretty disruptive like the cacophony society or the  suicide club that are being really the one establishing a bit the idea of burning man  and so what the Fred was telling me by looking at burning man actually is an example that  now business is really working with disruption because from one side is empowering a community  but from the other is completely you know creating a revenue from that and so in that  sense a burning man is a clear example also I would say many people working at Google  go there also many people working at the Silicon Valley because it's a moment of freedom that  people can experience but also is a big moment of networking for Silicon Valley companies  so I developed something going back to my scheme here that's I call the art of disrupting  business and so I say maybe we should change the structure we should also change the political  perspective because to be antagonistic oppositional for me doesn't work anymore because we have  been already understood that's a business are as appropriated a lot rhetoric that was  really pretty used by hackers in the 90s and so instead of being confrontational that is  actually I think is something you just lose your battle is better is there to be disruption  and what I'm speaking about is a model in which from one side the artist are trying  to disrupt business by working on the system from between and at the same time also business  is creating disruption by creating also innovation so this is my disruptive feedback loop that's  I'm going also to explain now with the difference example and involves dire directly in different  layers artists hacker activists entrepreneurs and also networkers so one example that's  also I like to bring is of course Napster and I think Napster has been a great example  of a disruptive innovation because in 1999 really introduce the idea of file sharing  in a way that becomes kind of massive because the people really trying to interpret the  music industry in a different way so I think that's a Napster that was also really accepted  a lot from the hacker community at the beginning I think is really showing how this layer of  perturbance is actually working and then I don't know if Stallman would be happy that  I say that but I think also GNU Linux as an operative system has been really also disruptive  technology because introduce in the market completely something that the market didn't  expect and really disrupt what's in that time was the windows and Apple business but how  do we connect these with the artistic practices and in my book I'm trying to analyze different  concept and also different case studies that are all working with idea of disruption so  from one side they are disrupting the business because they are interfering with that and  from the other I'm actually analyzing on project that create business by making disruption  and so I can also give you specific example then if you are interested you can easily  download my book from the internet but two example that I always like to bring are the  Sepuku artistic project and also Anna Damolo so I start first with Sepuku.  Sepuku was developed by the Italian collective Le Lien's Invisible especially Pre emerges we've got Sepuku  And their idea was really to try to understand how Facebook works and especially what is behind the code when you create your login inside the system.  And they were really working on this tension between the open and closed nature of social media and also trying to work on this unpredictable consequence that are generated by disruptive use of it.  So basically by doing your login, you are going to inside the seppuku and you could create your virtual suicide.  So seppuku is actually a Japanese virtual suicide, actually physical suicide.  That means you have to cut your belly and has been also used by the Luther Brissett project in 1999 when they declared the ends of the project.  So they took again this kind of practice and they say we should all create our suicide in Facebook and this become really viral.  So there were many people that were doing that and was interesting because they were really using and appropriating the code of the login of Facebook.  But at the same time when you were committed your suicide, basically you were canceling yourself from Facebook and also you were receiving a high score,  more suicide of people you were managing to create that were following you.  And the question was really I'm actually really able to live my virtual world with Facebook.  And at the end of course was kind of easy way of trying to reflect on that in the sense that I think also this was intelligent from their side.  Because they say okay you can create your seppuku but then if you want to go back you know you can, you just do login again, you are back in Facebook.  So for them was not really the point of disrupting completely Facebook but they wanted to make people reflect on what to use Facebook means.  And also what means to create friendship in Facebook, how you can use the code of Facebook.  And of course they received from Facebook a cease and desist letter and the things went on for kind of long time.  Another example that I like to bring you is the Anna Damolo project and they were also coming from Italy and working especially in that time like 2008-2009.  And basically Anna Damolo is the acronym of on the anomala that in English could be translated with anomalous wave.  And was a movement of different students that were protesting against cuts of education, research.  That's actually was a phenomenon that is still happening but became really massified during that time.  There were a lot of protests not only in Italy but also around Europe and the world.  And so they created somebody that was a fictional identity, this Anna Damolo that you can see on the screen.  Anna Damolo also is trying to reflect on what means the idea of creating a virtual character that could be used to become viral.  That could be appropriated by people not refusing the fact of being Facebook but really trying to understand how Facebook works and trying to turn it to your own advantage.  So they created something that was appropriated by a lot of students.  We had both the graphic logo of Anna Damolo and also the different morphing image that created a real person that people use to turn back their profile of Facebook into Anna Damolo.  And people were claiming Anna Damolo is the new Minister of Education, University and Research and we are occupying the ministry at the moment.  And so they created also the phasement of the website and were allowing people to leave different messages by using a telephone line that they also build up.  And from these different messages of the experience of the people being Anna Damolo, they created also a book that was published in 2009.  So why am I speaking about that?  Because I think that all these projects really are explaining as something kind of specific.  So that's possible to disrupt system from the inside, especially trying to look for the holes and the vulnerability of these systems.  So I'm here having a quote of a really interesting book from Canadian researcher Richard Day that wrote this book named Gramsci is Dead.  And he's writing, there will be always holes even when there are no longer any margins.  And I think that is a bit the form of disrupting these and I'm speaking about really trying to reflect what are actually the holes that we could infiltrate.  And in which sense, what are the different experience and intervention that we could imagine by really understanding our technology work by understanding what is the code behind the interface.  So when anonymous came, I was of course really happy because I think that this was exactly showing that certain, I don't know if people were really familiar with Luther Blissett or Monty Cansin and the Neoism.  But for me, somehow these different entity that you cannot even call a movement was replicating some of these strategies by really reflecting on the vulnerability of system and also the discourse of anonymity.  That was really important aspect of these previous practices that I told you.  And then, so the question for me becomes, is really important to be effective in politics, in culture and also in the media struggle.  And I think that maybe we should also question what is the effectiveness dialectic because I don't think this works anymore and this makes us really an easy target.  And I think we learn from Luther Blissett, from Neoism and they all were saying it's really hard to see any truth.  And by questioning what is the truth, then you had to really try to create new form of strategies that could disrupt the system.  And I'm also bringing you another example. This is a project that I was creating at Transmediale 2013 and has been developed by the Telecom Unistan Collective by Ramla Borberlin and also by a huge network of postal artists.  This was called Octo P71, was a pneumatic system that we created by connecting different stations inside the house, the culture and the wealth.  It was something that the Telecom Unistan also called the official miscommunication platform of Transmediale 2013 by following their idea of miscommunication.  And I think in this idea of miscommunication, in the fact that you can really question a system from the inside but also being playful and ironic, there is also the answer I was looking for.  And this specific project, maybe I just described you briefly, was something like a reflection of a social network system, especially the idea was that there was a corporation, Octo,  that was trying to imagine a worldwide pneumatic post system that was connecting different households and we were doing like the beta testing at Transmediale by connecting the different rooms of the house, the culture and the wealth.  And it was really a centralized system because there was a main station and different periphyric stations and you could exchange the capsules that were traveling inside the pipes by really administrating this station.  But it was also really, if you want, a co-existent of opposition project because it was from one side dealing with closeness of system from one side with openness.  And the idea of openness was related to the presence of the male artist because Vittorio Baroni, this postal artist that I mentioned before,  collected a lot of presence of many postal artists around the world that actually sent to us a capsule and this capsule that could travel around inside the pipes could be open and inside there were some instructions that the people, the visitor could perform.  So it was also an interesting interpretation of how to perform something that is traveling inside the closed system.  And I was also really happy when the last Chaos Computer Club, there were some people that went on with this project and they created a new version of that that was completely open, distributed and also based on the do-it-yourself idea that they call side and stress.  Probably if you have been at the CCC Congress you have seen that. So I would like to finally to conclude with two examples. I mean one example that also I think is really interesting in this kind of discussion on how to learn to be pervasive  and how to understand that reality is made of different layers is the work of Trevor Paglin. And we have been collaborating recently in a panel of Tras Mediale that I was creating together with Jacoble Baum and also Laura Poitras.  And specifically in their discourse of art as evidence and also in the discourse of the photos that Trevor does of drones, there is the idea that actually art could become a tool for evidence but at the same time reality is not something that you just can't see from one perspective.  But there are really many perspectives you can work with. And this is actually a fault of drones and you don't see them but they are there. And that is why I think the example of Trevor is really along this line because he is really showing you that maybe what you can do is try to reflect on the  unpredictability of reality and also on the fact that there are different layers of interpretation and these layers of interpretation are not so far away from you. You know they are on the sky and if you have different eyes you can actually see them.  So how is it possible to disrupt the system from within by understanding really how the system works, how you can see what is around us with different eyes and also understanding that art could be a form of evidence.  So this is my new project that I just tell you briefly because I mean I just launching it now is a disruption network lab and I'm planning to be active in the next months hopefully years at the Y Art House in Berlin.  And I'm reflecting on really how to create a curatorial program but also a hub of research and practice related to the idea of disruption that I'm speaking about how to create a co-existent of opposition and how actually to invite people that are really questioning the  truth because I think that's a you know truth is something that could be see from really different angles and there is always somebody that has actually more resources to force the truth on you.  This is also something Dimitri Klein always says by speaking on a venture communism and so maybe instead of really trying to have a truth that is more truth of the truth of who people that have power you should really question what the truth is and question by understanding how to create different layer of interpretation.  So I just conclude by saying that if you are interested in this subject you can go to that website where there are my different books and you can download them and enjoy and thanks a lot and also I hope you have a really interesting questions.  Yeah.  Thank you Tatiana.  Are there any questions in the room.  Don't be shy.  Yes.  Hi thank you for your talk.  You said that art alters businesses by interfering with them.  Can you can you just specify this a little bit more is it is it like entering the DNA of businesses and how do businesses react to them I mean.  I think when I speak about that as I say I'm referring to the idea of disruptive innovation. So the idea of introducing in the market something that the market doesn't expect.  And if you go back on the history of art especially the avant-garde.  This is exactly the strategy that the avant-garde were making really working with the unexpected with the unpredictable and try to disrupt the system from within.  I think also we had had a really great example during these days with the keynotes opening of the yes man because I think since many years now because they have been really active in the net art scene.  They have been questioning the discourse of business by interfering with it.  I really understand how it works. I mean they know how to infiltrate because they studied the logic of it. And at the same time they understand how to work with your identity with your perception of yourself in trying to enter the  business. So it's more like her strategy. You know I'm not. I have not a recipe for the successful business here because as I say I'm not a business person but I think that business especially today really show how to be pervasive.  And you know I think even the social networks companies and web to is really showing us how to do that. You mean trying to use something that is disrupting a market that we know.  I also think that business has been dying since down doing since many years if you think about you know the advertisements agency. There have been a constant recycle of a reappropriation also of the so-called counterculture in the 60s.  And so my point of view is you know this is nothing new. The appropriation is something that always happen. But business change because now is became really flexible pervasive and is also actually working a lot with openness to yourself.  Social networking. So I'm telling the people doesn't make sense anymore just to be antagonistic because you know there have been somebody that have been faster than us.  I think actually should do the other way around trying to appropriate business. So it's not a matter of language. For example when I was speaking with a lot of activists at the beginning they really didn't like my work.  You know because I was coming from a tradition of more antagonistic practices and they didn't like I use the word business. I say why you have to use the word business to speak about radical artistic practices.  I think that's why I like this word. And then I was saying actually that is why I'm using it because I think that we should start also appropriating the language that we are dealing with.  And so actually what is business. And if you go into the etymology of the the world then you see that actually business has a really different connotation because business means being busy being somebody that is constantly trying to achieve something.  And that has to do with anxiety with really trying to do something all the time. So I was not immediately something to do with economy. And so I think OK maybe we can also start to reflect on this specific word.  And then with Jeff Cox with published this anthology they are really interesting contribution like for example Franco Berardi before saying I think I mean he really demonstrating how nasty could be the world business if you really bring it on yourself and trying to imagine that actually we are now working all the time  because also when we use a social medium we are working you know because there is somebody that is making a profit from our relationship. So there are really a lot of layers of interpretation. And I'm also coming from more kind of situationalistic approach in which I think that's not only media  but also language is not neutral. So and I think business really taught us that because all the at the first web to all convention I went I remember there was one in 2004 year in Berlin and also there was Timora I laid I were really speaking about hacker culture.  That was like what is possible. I mean for me was really something that was coming from another perspective because I was coming from Italy you know and we always say that hacking was something else. So that is why I say wait a second maybe have to start going back here  and understanding that these kind of these courses made of different layers and then trying to bring it back to the community and coming from and also trying to see if there could be people that could be inspired by this way of seeing the reality you know but there is also not something that I invented.  There is really as I say a long tradition of artistic practices that are dealing with that I just I am just advocating that there will be even more because I think that the idea of the truth as a unique whom a holistic concept is actually really dangerous because you could be really  attacked by somebody that claim that has a bigger truth than yours and more powerful and there is always somebody that is more powerful than you. So I think instead of being in this dialectic maybe it's better to go outside of that and trying to enter the system of what you're trying to criticize from the inside.  Any other questions or additions inspirations.  Yeah thank you for the talk. I was I was wondering if you feel that this strategy is more likely to be adopted in certain cultures.  Or if you feel it's like a very you know if some cultures and scenes are more open to it like geographically. I don't know because I mean in my research I was really trying to map different perspective.  And then of course there was a limit because I could not investigate. You know too much and of course I'm missing a lot of prospecting coming more from Asia other country the south.  But I would say that there is a really interesting dialectic between like the history of net culture in Europe and what it was in US. But still these things are speaking. You know because I think they actually feed each other. And I was also having an interesting conversation with Jacob about that because he was the one that really  suggests me the idea of the mutual feedback loop when in 2009 he was working. I mean it was part of the noise bridge collective of San Francisco. And he was told me that actually you know a lot of hacker space is not a noise bridge.  And I think it was very particular because it was more coming from kind of European tradition of you know anarchism and also politics were actually in US supported by Microsoft Google.  I thought wow how is possible hackers are actually happy to get money from Microsoft and Google. Actually I'm not here in this convention support by Microsoft. So I don't know. But you know I think that maybe we should go so beyond this way of thinking because maybe  it doesn't matter anymore. You know what they were telling me was at least in this discussion. You know I mean many hackers space is especially one in Mountain View that's you know I don't know if still existing probably yes it's called hacker dodge.  They were telling me but we don't have no problem to get this money. At least we can also be free to do what we want. So there is a really different perspective there inside. I would say in a car space in Italy at least one coming from more  political tradition would have always refused to have money from Microsoft Google. But personally I think that this way of antagonistic perspective doesn't bring anywhere. So I think that instead we should more work on the  interferences of these different cultures. And that is why I'm questioning what is business disruption and actually seeing as I say paradoxically that we should learn from business in a way can be really effective and pervasive.  Yeah thank you again Tatiana for this detailed input again. Take the chance to ask or to give us some more ideas about hacktivism, hacker culture.  Thank you very much for your speech was really interesting. What I miss is who is the enemy. I assume you don't accept the word enemy because you're talking about disruption but what is then the final goal.  Who take advantage from this disruption and who is affected by it. No as I say I don't think we should think about in terms of enemy anymore because this is again a way of working with politics and culture and technology that is completely  dialectic. And I think this form of antagonism I hope I demonstrate doesn't work anymore nowadays. And so I don't know actually who could benefit of these. I can see that there are many artists that's already using the idea of disruption.  And it's actually something that's really proper of the hacker ethic because all the hackers are been always working by trying to disrupt the system from within trying to opening up the system trying to understand what is inside.  I mean the cost the so called hands on prospective of hacker culture. So you know from one side is not something new is just something that I think maybe we should have knowledge and trying to also experience directly by embodying it.  And so is a and is a from one side an artistic input that I'm giving. But from the other side I can also tell you that a lot of business company are actually working with disruption already because is is a concept that comes from business is really.  I mean the basic of how many advertisement agency work also start ups. So I also don't think I'm saying something new for many companies that are here and has been also recently invited in Italy last year from to actually speak with people that are doing business.  I mean I was invited from the Omnicon media group that is an advertisement company that is worldwide and there is a section of it in Italy. And they were really interested in these things.  They told me I really want to know what you think about business disruption. Can you tell us your point of view because we work on disruption by you know referring to products.  In fact the companies that were there where you know there was the Barilla the clinic. I mean Renault really companies that are selling product and initially I was wondering OK I don't know if what I'm actually bringing there is something that's.  They will be really interested. But then by having a dialogue with them I understood that it was the case because I could also see what was on the other side of the coin and also have a really interesting dialogue with people that are doing something coming from a different perspective.  But still we are speaking about similar concept. So in that sense I say we should work by bringing oppositions together and trying to highlight co-existence of oppositions. And then in that sense I think you know of course then you decide what is your enemy is a more personal interpretation of that.  But I think that at the same time is also something that's you know is more related to your specific background. But in the more bigger picture that I'm presenting I'm also thinking that we should go beyond this antagonistic structure of power  because I think was already demonstrated in many situations that then at the end you end up doing the game of the people you want to oppose.  So some other question or we go to get a coffee. OK if there aren't any further questions I would like to thank you Tatiana again for her very inspiring talk. Thank you for.
re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_0_1919.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_1920_3143.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_3144_4163.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_4164_5279.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_5280_6983.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_6984_10679.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_10680_17639.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_17640_21455.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_21456_23543.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_23544_25727.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_25728_26051.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_26052_26147.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_26148_38891.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_38892_39299.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_39300_39407.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_39408_46055.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_46056_46547.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_46548_47783.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_47784_47951.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_47952_47999.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_48000_48491.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_48492_49091.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_49092_49967.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_49968_60203.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_60204_62111.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_62112_63911.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_63912_70223.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_70224_70811.png re_publica_2014_-_Tatiana_Bazzichelli__The_Art_of_Disru____QhfSk9o2aXU_70812_72417.png