There are a few very interesting comments on the P2P organizations piece.

I think that to be able to become a system it has to grow a little further than a simple network of people knowing each other. We need to find the balance between the solid links between people that a traditional company requires and total anarchie. It's this balance that will make the difference.

While the market might not be ready yet for this kind of structures (most customers probably would still feel safer with a "real" company), it could probably work well in terms of back-end system for small shops and professionals, who could then afford to approach larger projects. Of course, these people would need to be guaranteed in terms of quality, costs and timing, after all it's their face the one that the customers sees and they are the ones managing the deal. At the same time, partners in a project would need to be sure that they would be paid. After all, this is the kind of safety that a company provides (or at least it would be supposed to). But is there a way to make everybody feel reasonably safe without having the weight of a company?

I think that total transparency in how such projects would be approached is one of the keys. The other might be a some kind of reciprocal "authentication" that would help to create trust inside the group.

Ben Hammersley writes:

Combine this with some digital social network theory, and we're onto something very cool.

Digital social network theory? I guess I'd better start doing some more research.