[p2p-research] thinking about leapfrogging

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, Oct 05, 2008 16:19:00 PM -0500, Marcin Jakubowski wrote:
> I added my 2 cents at the end of
> 
> http://p2pfoundation.net/Thoughts_on_P2P_production_and_deployment_of_physical_objects
 
as I had said:
> > (Marcin, please do trim email, thanks)

Actually, I had asked for:

> > specific comments about specific parts

not for a generic commentary. I'll byte though.

> Human ethics, land stewardship, and spirituality need be mixed into
> the above discussion

Indeed, but that only changes how to **deal** with the facts, not the
facts themselves. The multinational corporate answers to certain facts
is the one will all know. A better answer must sure include ethics,
spirituality and so on, but has to deal with reality anyway.

Do local-p2p-all-the-way *technical* alternatives to nationwide power
grids and telecom networks or huge semiconductor fabs exist? Don't you
lose a lot on real quality of life giving those things up just because
they're not p2p?

> Until spiritual evolution of humanity as a whole occurs, the best
> case - by design - is that of localized, small scale production -
> for whatever the physical good.  There are items, of course, such as
> titanium, that may not be available in a local economy. Trade may
> occur for these items

That article isn't against p2p production of essential, survival-level
physical goods. And I didn't say P2P is bad, I only suggest it may not
be the best answer to all possible problems. And that article is ONLY
about cases where:

- if you stick to p2p and local small scale, you may be sitting on the
  greatest titanium (or gallium, since it's about semiconductors) mine
  in the world, and still it wouldn't do you any good, because to make
  useful and usable stuff out of raw Gallium you'd need a whole
  state-of-the-art factory like the Fab36 quoted in the article. The
  day when it will be possible to cook an Athlon multi-core CPU like
  cookies, in a kitchen oven from raw materials, I'll be the first to
  cheer, any basic research of that kind has my blessing, but until
  that day it doesn't make sense to ignore the limits.

- if you give up those services or products just because they can't be
  done p2p you regress at least one century, as far as real quality of
  life is concerned.

> A discussion of consequences is missing. There are global and
> geopolitical consequences

I didn't discuss consequences because that never was the goal of the
article. It does little good to discuss consequences without clearing
first some quite unrealistic assumptions on what reality makes
available to you. I stopped at clearing those points and asking "can
we draw some general conclusion about P2P from this?"

Sure we must discuss consequences, but only after those specific
limits are either accepted as starting points because they're
real, or refused because proven wrong.

Marco

-- 
Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
software is used *around* you:            http://digifreedom.net/node/84