[p2p-research] Fwd: Follow up

Thu Apr 16 07:12:35 CEST 2009

Hi Marc,

I dispute that my approach is purely moral. While I'm certainly not
knowledgeable enough about natural evolution and complexity theories, it is
based on scrupulous observation of current evolutionary trends, and I want
to use human agency to steer these trends in a particular direction.

Human animals are part of nature, but also endowed with intention and the
capacity to realize social relationships that go beyond that of the animal
world. If that were not the case, we would fully abandon the old, let people
with handicaps die, etc.. but we don't, because, despite the many ills of
our societies, there is a moral agency at work that is specifically human
(yes, many aspects are shared in part by different animal species, but the
totality of it is a qualitative change)

The p2p work has been read by people knowledgeable about
evolution/complexity who told me the p2p approach does not contradict what
is known about human evolution (see in particular evolution's arrow, the
book)

Michel

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:06 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:

> There is a moral orientation in all your saying, but it's lacking the
> evolutionary bias, which is important, IMO.
>
> Capitalism is built on a wrong model of evolution. Old thinking. Darwinian
> in nature.
>
> Experimental evidence and new game theory work agrees that there is a lot
> more cooperation in nature than can be explained by Darwinian theory or
> capitalism.
>
> That's where I want to go, beyond morality vs Darwinism and into how nature
> actually works (read: more cooperative than Darwinism but with an
> evolutionary focus) because I think, ultimately, it's pointless to be more
> fair than nature, or at least that's the struggle I'm going through right
> now, which I'm sure is shared with many...
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I of course agree with your correction for para 2.
>>
>> What I would say is that 1) the cost of reproduction is marginal; 2) the
>> cost of the first copy is variable; 3) the cost for the generalized
>> infrastructure is socialized and should remain so
>>
>> Of course, I often use the simplifying, but ultimately misleading polarity
>> of immaterial vs. material, to make the important point of understanding
>> abundance, while in fact scarcity and abundance are polarities with many
>> intermediate stages, as so well explained in the work of Roberto Verzola.
>>
>> So, the answer is: 1) free sharing as much as possible given the
>> constraints of first copy cost (moderate forms of IP are okay for me); 2)
>> continued support for socialized internet infrastructure which allows
>> abundance to occur in the field of reproduction. Market and other economies
>> deriving from open design can support the sharing and commons through
>> benefit sharing; while the partner state can intervene as 'subsidiary'
>> force, and find a social solution for peer producers sustainability (full
>> basic income or transitional labour support measures.
>>
>> Michel
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:41 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Well, both suggestions make a lot of sense.
>>>
>>> However, for the second suggestion I have a problem with the definition
>>> of "non scarce" and "immaterial" and, coincidentally Patrick was asking the
>>> same question today on Stefan's list, and no one really is giving a
>>> realistic answer, IMO.
>>>
>>> Digital and services goods are not immaterial and they have actual costs
>>> (of R&D, energy and maintenance) associated with the underlying
>>> infrastructure, so I consider them "non scarce" but still bound to costs and
>>> subject to some kind of sustainable exchange... So the question is what is
>>> the most liberal kind of exchange that is still sustainable (given digital
>>> goods and services do have costs)
>>>
>>> Marc
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:33 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Marc,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for sharing,
>>>>
>>>> concerning your para 1, why not consider 'subsidiarity' as a policy
>>>> framework, i.e.letting the lowest but most appropriate level do the work and
>>>> use centralisation as an enabler? in other words, start with household based
>>>> renewables, complement with neighborhood-based, regional, national,
>>>> international, each doing what the previous layer can't do on its own
>>>>
>>>> concerning para 2, I wonder if exchange or the market is hierarchical by
>>>> itself, when it involves equivalent exchange, without passing by prior
>>>> inequality and the forces expropriation of producers that was the condition
>>>> for capitalist markets?however, you seem to talk about non-scarce resources,
>>>> so you mean in the immaterial economy, then in that case, markets are
>>>> unnecessary and only exist because enforced scarcity,
>>>>
>>>> Michel
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:24 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just sharing some notes on the current problems in the P2P Energy
>>>>> Economy model
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>> From: marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:23 PM
>>>>> Subject: Follow up
>>>>> To: James Edwards <bluecollargreenie at gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi James,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry to have dropped the ball on our discussion re: energy flow
>>>>> based currency...
>>>>>
>>>>> I went to Arizona where we had no Internet and learned all about solar
>>>>> power
>>>>>
>>>>> Then I became homeless for a while, lost my girlfriend, etc
>>>>>
>>>>> And now I'm back to work thanks to a sudden and unexpected turn of
>>>>> events
>>>>>
>>>>> The problems with the P2P Energy Economy as of v3.00.00 boil down to
>>>>> this:
>>>>>
>>>>> Issue 1:
>>>>>
>>>>> "it's hard to see how individual energy producers would have any
>>>>> substantial surplus if they had tiny solar generators and it's even harder
>>>>> to see how there could be a flow of energy from peers with surplus to peers
>>>>> with deficit if everyone had a surplus. This is the basic and universal
>>>>> issue (or two issues,) IMO. For each given type of product (e.g. energy,
>>>>> milk, cars, etc) we can't have everyone be a producer because the "flow of
>>>>> energy" is the "economy of life" and without a deficit on one side and a
>>>>> surplus on the other there is no flow (or movement) of energy (and no flow
>>>>> of energy equal no life, literally.)
>>>>>
>>>>> So in order to have both the maximum surplus of the thing being
>>>>> produced and the maximum flow of that thing from the surplus side to the
>>>>> deficit side, the production tends towards centralization (within each
>>>>> geographic or virtual market)"
>>>>>
>>>>> Issue 2:
>>>>>
>>>>> The very act of paying someone (for a non-scarce resource) and
>>>>> expecting some service back creates a master-slave (or more mildly a
>>>>> 'customer-server' relationship) relationship... and this is a type of
>>>>> hierarchy basically. I'm having an issue with the idea of a hierarchy even
>>>>> though it's established in nature and even if we use the kind of renewable
>>>>> hierarchies that I describe (in passing) in the P2P Energy Economy. I'm
>>>>> studying two game theoretical models, the Prisoners Dilemma game and the
>>>>> Snowdrift (or Hawk-Dove) game in the context of hierarchies, latices with
>>>>> limited set of neighbor-to-neighbor interactions per element and networks
>>>>> with random interactions. I haven't had enough time with all that has been
>>>>> happening to produce any insight as far as the best type of system from a
>>>>> moral and evolutionary perspective but I know the P2P Energy Economy
>>>>> sections concerned with organization are lacking.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have anything to share on your end, as far as your work goes,
>>>>> please feel free to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Marc Fawzi
>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>>>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>>>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
>>>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>>
>>>> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
>>>> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
>>>> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>>>>
>>>> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>>>
>>>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>>>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Marc Fawzi
>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>
>> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
>> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
>> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>>
>> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>
>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Marc Fawzi
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>

-- 
Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
http://p2pfoundation.ning.com

Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090416/aae46d89/attachment.html>