Facecoin at Moneylab2

Facecoin At Furtherfield Gallery

Facecoin by Rob Myers” by Paul Ros, licensed Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial.

Hot on the heels of its appearance at “The Human Face of Cryptoeconomies”, Facecoin is featuring in the “Trading Floor” exhibition at Moneylab2 on Thursday 3rd and Friday 4th December 2015 at Pakhuis De Zwijger in Amsterdam.

Lots of great people are speaking at the event, and I’m very proud that Facecoin is part it. You can find out more in Femke Herregraven’s awesome programme booklet.

About "Shareable Readymades"

Balloon Dog

(Image by Furtherfield Gallery, Licensed Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial)

The formerly transgressive gesture of the readymade and the assisted readymade - nominating or recreating a non-art object as art - has long since been recuperated by the artworld. The junkyard urinals and joke shop balloons of the early 20th Century have been replaced with expensive limited edition sculptures of them created by anonymous artisans, their status policed by lawyers and writers.

The reputational dynamics of the artworld mean that non-art objects transformed into art objects by artists become part of their ouvre, or in contemporary art terms their brand. This represents a form of semantic enclosure, both of the potential of the object for alternative representations and of the artist’s particular take on the object. Academic reinforcement of this enclosure in terms of originality and reputation (through inclusion in positive or negative critical canons) causes a chilling effect on artistic potential. Legal enforcement of this enclosure becomes censorship. Art must be free to refer to and depict the world, including culture and including other art. This is a rare example of an artistic imperative being complementarily moral and aesthetic.

Originality and the artist’s hand are valid subjects of critique within art - the fetish of the touch of the master as resource for and product of the art market and academia. But the returns on the reputational capital gained from being the creator of such a critique can exceed that of a previously historically conventional practice over time. And this critique of the artisanal production of art can also be an uncritical validation of managerialism.

Both artisanal mastery and neoconceptual managerialism derive much of their increasing value over time from externalities. Artists do not (and should not) pay for audience, critical or market attention to their work that increases their reputational and economic value. But both artisanal studios and neoconceptual outsourcing rely on reputationally disenfranchised skilled labour to produce the art that accrues value in and to the artist’s name. The labour and reputational dynamics of the production of art are also valid subjects of critique within art, including that involved in the production art that critiques artistic originality. Is paying these workers enough, or should we hack the art historical firewall of the artists signature? Who are the artisans, studio assistants and engineers who instantiate contemporary art? What is the aesthetic and social impact of considering them?

“Shareable Readymades” puts these critiques into tension with the hype and legal uncertainty around 3D printing. A decade ago I said “Now make art with it”. What’s emerged from making these particular objects is that they are a good resource for experiencing and thinking through the experience and implications of 3D printing if you’re familiar with art history. “You wouldn’t steal a car”, argue the old anti-copying warnings on DVDs that try and persuade you not to copy an infinitely copyable resource. Copyright on autographic artworks is a category error, on assisted readymades it is doubly so. But where it exists we can ironise it with Copyleft to ensure rather than frustrate people’s freedom to deal in common imagery and culture. This returns objects to the artistic commons in physically instantiable virtual form.

Each Shareable Readymade was commissioned from a digital 3D modelling artist, who retains copyright on the results of their labour (Chris Webber for the Urinal and Pipe, Bassam Kurdali for the Ballon Dog, myself for #arthistory and the Soup Can). The objects are made available to the commisioning “artist” (Dr. Charlotte Frost for #arthistory, myself for the others) on the same terms they are made available to the public, the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike license. The “artist” is credited with commissioning the artwork using the Attribution part of the license. The rights-holding relations in the artwork are more just, the reputational ones are more open to question. As more people have incorporated the objects into their own art, fulfilling the ambition that they support the artistic commons, these questions have only grown. It is not clear how attribution for 3D printed works should function, should attribution conventions for art or for the license trump this? If so, which?

The art historical, technical, and socioeconomic tensions that make up the Shareable Readymades are not intended to be simple or didactic. Each one has a different history and positioning in relationship to its referent. I hope that they are fun physically and conceptually and that they are useful objects for thought.

Shareable Readymades Watch


(Image by Paul Ros, Licensed Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial)

Here’s Pipe in Furtherfield’s show “The Human Face of Economics”, along with Urinal and Balloon Dog. You can buy one from them along with a certificate of inauthenticity.

The 3D Additivist Manifesto

The 3D Additivist Manifesto video features the Urinal in its teaser image.

Modern Times

Here’s an animated GIF by Alan Butler featuring a rare credited appearance of Balloon Dog.

Melting Balloon Dog

And this melting Balloon Dog is from Michael Green’s luxury.obj

If you see the Shareable Readymades in the wild, let me know!


Parahash is a command line tool that titles paragraphs with their hashes (and the entire document with the hash of those hashes). It handles a subset of Markdown and tries to ignore formatting that shouldn’t effect the identity of the text (extra whitespace, emphasis, hyperlinks).

You can control the represention and length of the hash, so:

Paragraph one.

Second paragraph.

Final paragraph.

can become anything from:

# f104ee138a2cf14e5af642647c7f28111240c66ebee50e00c222a9a435c12e40

## dbcba560ab93aa79c7e358a69848177ed0b52365f631c40ca4db070a2e319e96

Paragraph one.

## 3fc3deaa2b3609eb7d096478e4e522fc071348be1b8e116ce204cff63c08af80

Second paragraph.

## 5b8a59d072daef094e33b457e9638b8dd46de361db618e1baac29ce7b31259b5

Final paragraph.


# hahaz-gimuv-somom-vajaz-kuroj-honah-zudul-dibof

## razot-bojip-givop-nunop

Paragraph one.

## gazug-poput-kusof-rolob

Second paragraph.

## pavoj-biloj-piral-nasuv

Final paragraph.

Why would you want to do this? Well, it’s more useful than numbering them. ;-)



Blockchain Aesthetics - Meshes

A transaction rendered as a mesh

The menu for configuring mesh rendering

I’ve added some three.js renderings to Blockchain Aesthetics. You can show live or arbitrary hashes, in a variety of forms, and save them in 3D printable forms.

See here for blocks.

And here for transactions.

Source code here.