[p2p-research] Fwd: P2P Energy Economy: request for critical feedback

[Florent]

Hi Stan,

Sorry for the late response.

> A lot of centralization is economically inevitable, driven by the
> combination of economies of scale and cities that develop as hubs of
> commerce, neither of which are capitalism-dependent.  Those basic
> trends are not effects (certainly not perverse ones!) of capitalism
> per se.

Yes, i understand.

> in economic geography.)  That said, within those trends are particular
> permutations resulting from how our governments define, for example,
> land property rights, and their related taxation.  Some of these
> permutations certainly qualify, at least in my mind, as perverse.

Hm, as a practical example, when permutations put highly centralized
entities in monopoly state  ? So in the end, the perversity comes from
the influence of highly centralized entities/powers on the local laws
? As if supermarkets lobbying would enforce regulations against small,
local producers/distributors ?

> If we look at what current technology makes possible that was
> impossible before, we can see where some of the factors are changing,
> such as economies of scale within evolving organizational models.
> This may change the trends, leading to less centralization in some
> areas/industries, but that's not because centralization was a mistake
> in the first place.

I see; it was a necessary step, such as the computer industry
(de)centralization cycles (mainframe-PC-cloud computing).

However, isn't the current (economical) system inertia against
changing induced by the maximization of growth and profits without
regards to the resources and existing ecosystems ? For instance, why
are they no regulations regarding a supermarket (sorry for the very
recurrent example) 's effect on local scale commerce ? Suprisingly, do
you know why there are still local commerces in Paris ? Because they
have the right to stay open during the evening... Take this right from
them, or give it to centralized entities, and they will inevitably
fall down...

> It seems like centralization has become a de facto badguy
> (decentralization being the hero), much like globalization.

Yes. My bad here, i am being influenced by both where i live (Paris)
and how young i am, not to mention that i am an engineer, not an
economist. I do not want to end in such a trivial escaping.

>> Of course this scientifically-oriented approach to studying local
>> community models (based on needs/resources flows and network-derived
>> principles such as scalability and robustness) can easily appear as
>> non-ethical/technocentric/arbitrarian.
>
> What approach are you speaking of?

Trying to separate local (< 50 km) and global layers in a hypothetical
post-scarcity era, and recense appropriate theorical  and echnological
substrates for the respective scales, with an emphasis on the local
scale autonomy flows and architecture (grid).

I understand this is close to the Global Village idea (among other approaches).

> What models are you looking for /
> talking about?

I already began receiving interersting feedback regarding cybernetics
and sociocybernetics, technocracy theory, ... References that would
help me detailing my "intuitive grasp" (like marc said !). Thanks for
your critics !

Regards,

Florent