[p2p-research] Donation Networks

Sat Jan 24 23:34:01 CET 2009

I need to go thru use case development then development of the spec for the
software then actual coding of p2p trading browser (with simulated p2p
energy grid)

For now, still parking the model and figuring out if it's everything it can
be (quality wise) ... I'll know when the use cases start to come out on
their own.

The deal re: simplicity vs complexity (referring to a discussion I had on
Open Manufacturing) is that people tend to view the model's as a static
system but any model of any kind of economy is a dynamic system, so you can
have a model with 3 active parts in it that do not fall into an equilibrium
state or you can have a system with 500 active parts in it that fall into an
equilibrium state. Most people would consider the system with 3 parts to be
simpler than the system with 500 parts. However, only the opposite is true.
That's not to say that the degree of simplicity of a system is related to
the number of parts, but that it's related to the ability of the system to
fall into a stable equilibrium, or even a metastable one (and I think that
the existing economy has a metastable equilibrium, i.e. a stable pattern of
disruption)

So I'm also trying to harness intuitive/natural understanding about 'lasting
harmony' as I design the model. Yet, I have these thoughts that people will
do nothing under conditions of lasting harmony; that they'd sit idle and let
the days pass by or engage in entertaining themselves more than producing
change, but all stasis is disrupted by evolutionary tsunamis if not by tidal
waves.

So it looks like the most stable pattern is a pattern of disruption, i.e. a
metastable equilibrium.  But this should not be taken out of context.
Obviously we want to design systems that last by being open to change, or
that achieve stability by being open to instability (//note to self: this
should be moved under Axioms)

A key consideration is something called the 'logistic equation' (for
population change) and basically you can use it to predict a population's
growth and sudden collapse, and I want to apply it to the growth and
collapse of "harmless" monopolies where such monopolies cannot raise prices
under the model of 'trading at cost with joule tokens' and that can collapse
in-place (think of building demolition) without damaging the economy and be
rebuilt. That's the type of metastability (or pattern of disruption) that I
think I need in the model to allow it to perpetuate i.e. achieving stability
(or metastability to be exact) by being open to instability.

Sorry if I diverged from topic.

I would really love to see your system work and I know it can work but my
jumping into this conversation was in response to your wonder about what
makes some experiments sustainable while others only work for a limited
time... and my tentative answer as it relates to my model is given above...
which supersedes the survival/discovery paradigm

Lucky for me there is no tax on over thinking!   but I think that a certain
degree of complexity is essential if we are to build a 'living' system...

On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:

> What you are working on is interesting, for sure.
>
> How would 5 people go about trying your system right now? Reason that I ask
> is that I think I could *find* 5 people interested in trying it, if it is
> within their means to participate.
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 3:49 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It's a given that it will work, but I thought you're asking about what
>> makes certain experiments sustainable while others run aground after a
>> while.
>>
>> It's also given that _some_ people will continue to sacrifice self for the
>> benefit of the whole and for reward in the future ... This is sort of what
>> everyone on this list is doing.
>>
>> As far as a "system for sharing surplus" my favored view is a system for
>> trading surplus (using the-more-you-share-the-more-you-have logic) because I
>> think that is a more efficient form of sharing.
>>
>> I think the model design, not the world view, is what's different between
>> what you're doing now and what I'm working on for the long term.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> What I am proposing is no currency at all.
>>>
>>> It is a way of measuring the health of a system that is recognized as a
>>> "Commons".
>>>
>>> More replies follow...
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 2:15 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <<
>>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ps. an important question: what happened to p2paid? Why did the site
>>>>> activity seem to stop after a while? I beleive it is important to know why
>>>>> some projects like this succeed and some seem to lose momentum. It looks
>>>>> like a very noble effort.
>>>>>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Sam,
>>>>
>>>> 1. I had actually casually suggested that tokenizing emotional energy
>>>> using "thank you" notes as currency is the ultimate un-money, but I have
>>>> found out after 3 months of thinking<http://p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Energy_Economy>that such currency would work best (or most realistically) with goods and
>>>> services that can be produced and delivered in abundance and on sustainable
>>>> basis. More exactly, those that can be produced and delivered on continuous,
>>>> scalable, distributed basis. For example, digital content, peer-manufactured
>>>> goods made entirely from renewable resources (and that are produced
>>>> independently by many peers, certain distributed digital services (think
>>>> Mechanical Turk) etc.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am actually doing this on a small scale with real people in the near
>>> future, and seeing what emerges.  I have people currently interested in
>>> doing it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2. It is not sufficient to construct a nobel model based on high ideals.
>>>> People are driven by two continuous subconscious needs: survival and/or
>>>> discovery. Both of these needs need to be met, IMO, for a lasting dynamic to
>>>> emerge.
>>>>
>>>
>>> People have been giving things to one another for hundreds of thousands
>>> of years.
>>>
>>> People have even created systems for giving to each other ("potlatch" is
>>> one example).
>>>
>>> Giving and sharing have been a basic part of human survival since the
>>> very first humans.
>>>
>>> The model that I operate with is explicitly not based on high ideals. In
>>> fact, it is based on mostly on actual agent-based models. Particularly, it
>>> is based on an Altruism model descended from the work of R. Axelrod, which
>>> shows success thresholds even when pressure from all factors is high,
>>> provided that cost of "altruism" is low.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can say that life itself provides the survival and discovery plots,
>>>> but that's why it's hard to bring people into a new place where
>>>> opportunities for survival and discovery are very limited.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The model that I am proposing will appeal to some specific world views.
>>> In particular, those described by CW Graves as "Sacrifice Self for Reward
>>> Later", and "Sacrifice Self So That All May Gain Now".
>>>
>>> Human nature is not limited to physiological survival (I assume you are
>>> referring to physiological survival), and "discovery". Bio-Psycho-Social
>>> systems also reveal patterns related to psychological survival, social
>>> sustainability, and prediction/foresight.
>>>
>>> There is an unlimited, evolving, exponentially expanding spectrum of
>>> fundamental assumptions of existence associated with human nature that go
>>> beyond base needs, such as survival (as there are significant amounts of
>>> people who are not totally focused on basic physiological survival).
>>>
>>> What if people discover that they could meet some of their survival needs
>>> by creating a systematic way to share surplus?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's actually where I am in the design of P2P Energy Economy<http://p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Energy_Economy>.
>>>> Specifically, I've found out that the existing money creates a great
>>>> opportunity for experiencing a survival game by enforcing scarcity, and if
>>>> we come up with an epi-economy or "epiconomy" (a higher level economy that
>>>> lays on top of the existing one) that is predicated on sustainable abundance
>>>> then I think it needs to contain a discovery game within that
>>>> counter-balances the survival game going on in the existing economy.
>>>>
>>>> 3. There are other issues to designing a new kind of economy that apply
>>>> to what you're doing as well as what I'm working on, but I need to think
>>>> about them some more.
>>>>
>>>> Marc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Paolo, thanks for your response.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there an existing place to download http://www.p2paid.org source
>>>>>> code? If not, I can easily donate repository space for maintaining this, if
>>>>>> you want (plus issue que, and API).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is similar to what I am currently doing with
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://socialmediaclassroom.com/repo/hgwebdir.cgi/smc/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for http://socialmediaclassroom.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And we also have http://socialmediaclassroom.com/development which is
>>>>>> issue que and API
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me know if you are interested in that, and I am interested in
>>>>>> looking at a copy of your code, for sure. Thanks again!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 9:20 AM, <paola.dimaio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Samuel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have recently become a member of freecycle
>>>>>>> and what I see is fantastic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.freecycle.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> old things get used up by others, then passed on
>>>>>>> from spare parts to furniture, books, household items to the oddest
>>>>>>> thing around (offered /wanted)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> also, we have developed a drupal based tool
>>>>>>> www.p2paid.org which is free to use, open source if you want to
>>>>>>> install on your servers and change the config/GUI etc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hope useful pointers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>> PDM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Dear P2P Research,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > After some months working privately with agent based Altruism and
>>>>>>> > Cooperation models, I am working towards initiating an experiment
>>>>>>> with with
>>>>>>> > a small number regional and continental participants in creating a
>>>>>>> balanced
>>>>>>> > donation and distribution system.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > The system is fairly simple:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Participants list what they need, and fill mutual needs. Each
>>>>>>> person
>>>>>>> > maintains a "reputation" that is based on a "thank you" that is
>>>>>>> received
>>>>>>> > from the person they have donated to.  A tracking system monitors
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> > "carrying capacity" of donations. "thank you" assignments to
>>>>>>> participants
>>>>>>> > are monitored, and so too are receipts of donations. Optionally,
>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>> > participant may also register their own satisfaction with the
>>>>>>> system as a
>>>>>>> > whole.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Total satisfaction, plus a "thank you" (which is seen in the system
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> > individual satisfaction with what is donated) compared against
>>>>>>> satisfactory
>>>>>>> > receipt of donations (where you "thank" the other person, and thus
>>>>>>> add to
>>>>>>> > their rating), and a certain base level of overall needs met,
>>>>>>>  would then
>>>>>>> > give feedback to each user, showing that they may need to donate
>>>>>>> more, or
>>>>>>> > improve the quality of what they are giving to others, in order to
>>>>>>> maintain
>>>>>>> > total "health" of the system.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > In the United States, this is my proposal as a route for people to
>>>>>>> > distribute regulated goods like food items, fuel
>>>>>>> production/ingredients, etc
>>>>>>> > in way that is legal, and that avoids "market" exchanges (it is
>>>>>>> legal to
>>>>>>> > donate or give items to one another in the fashion proposed above).
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > As local food systems, and open product design/fabrication activity
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> > already increasing, myself and others are seeing the above as a
>>>>>>> plausible
>>>>>>> > way to pool and share resources. Your thoughts are appreciated.
>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>> > Sam Rose
>>>>>>> > Social Synergy
>>>>>>> > Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>>>>>>> > Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>>>>>>> > AIM: Str9960
>>>>>>> > Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
>>>>>>> > skype: samuelrose
>>>>>>> > email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>>>>>>> > http://socialsynergyweb.org/network/services
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > "When a distinguished elderly scientist states that something is
>>>>>>> possible,
>>>>>>> > he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is
>>>>>>> impossible,
>>>>>>> > he is very probably wrong."
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >    Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> > p2presearch mailing list
>>>>>>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Paola Di Maio
>>>>>>> **********************************
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Forthcoming
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i-Semantics 2009, 2 - 4 September 2009, Graz, Austria.
>>>>>>> www.i-semantics.tugraz.at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SEMAPRO 2009, Malta
>>>>>>> http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/RegistrationSEMAPRO09.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sam Rose
>>>>>> Social Synergy
>>>>>> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>>>>>> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>>>>>> AIM: Str9960
>>>>>> Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
>>>>>> skype: samuelrose
>>>>>> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>>>>>> http://socialsynergyweb.org/network/services
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "When a distinguished elderly scientist states that something is
>>>>>> possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is
>>>>>> impossible, he is very probably wrong."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sam Rose
>>>>> Social Synergy
>>>>> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>>>>> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>>>>> AIM: Str9960
>>>>> Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
>>>>> skype: samuelrose
>>>>> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>>>>> http://socialsynergyweb.org/network/services
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "When a distinguished elderly scientist states that something is
>>>>> possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is
>>>>> impossible, he is very probably wrong."
>>>>>
>>>>>    Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sam Rose
>>> Social Synergy
>>> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>>> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>>> AIM: Str9960
>>> Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
>>> skype: samuelrose
>>> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>>> http://socialsynergyweb.org/network/services
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "When a distinguished elderly scientist states that something is
>>> possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is
>>> impossible, he is very probably wrong."
>>>
>>>    Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sam Rose
> Social Synergy
> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
> AIM: Str9960
> Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
> skype: samuelrose
> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
> http://socialsynergyweb.org/network/services
>
>
>
> "When a distinguished elderly scientist states that something is possible,
> he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible,
> he is very probably wrong."
>
>    Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090124/7cc99040/attachment-0001.html>