[p2p-research] [p2p energy economy] Re: Open Source Manufacturing

Sun Mar 22 15:44:19 CET 2009

There are, as the wiki entry suggests, vectors to open.  It isn't a single
scale.

My crack at it:

Open

Open [systems, processes, organizations] attempt to minimize the associative
advantage of those who organize knowledge in favor of the advantage of
larger communities of stakeholders who are often less empowered to organize
knowledge in similar ways.  Viewing technology as knowledge that enables,
open technologists work toward inclusive and broad contributions rather than
self-interested and controlling agendas.  Such enabling is more likely to
foster positive feedback loops and dependent expansions than closed,
self-interested efforts.  There are numerous aspects (or vectors) of
openness that can include the following items (and others):

1. Transparancy of governance: The decisions, information inputs, research
and finances of entities claiming openness are readily accessible
particularly to those entities such as journalists, bloggers, activists and
the like who serve as community watchdogs and inspectors.

2. Inclusive membership for production and access to benefits:  Open
entities willingly include both producers and consumers of their outputs
with minimal barriers to entry, particularly barriers that transfer any
benefit to those who have previously contributed as producers or organizers
of knowledge.

3. Low overhead:  Open entities attempt to perform their services with
minimal costs of bureaucratic function.  This priority tends to enforce
limited missions of open entities rather than expansive, government-like
charters.

4. Technocratic and democratic decision processes:  Merit as a priority in
decision criteria refers back to rational rules of selection for quality,
efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness to consumers rather than criteria
that inure to producers or organizers of knowledge.  In the absence of
technocratic criteria, democratic processes emphasizing inclusiveness are
prioritized.

5. Reuse and extension:  Open entities prioritize reuse of resources and
encourage broad production and expansion of knowledge bases without links to
tightly controlled, owned, or otherwise consumer value limited components of
improvement.

Ryan Lanham

2009/3/22 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>

> a quick response to Marc, sorry I'm not answering more when on the road ..
>
> Marc:
>
> I do not think open is entirely subjective and beyond definition, to that
> definition would be contextual to our 'movement'
>
> see http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Open for links to open definition,
>
> as well as http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Standards where I keep a list
> of all open licenses and how they define openness,
>
> some kind of higher-level abstraction of these various attempts should be a
> possiblity, with perhaps a gradation in degrees of openness, from relative
> to 'near absolute'?
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 10:06 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > My definition of "open production system" overlaps with "renewable
>> > production system", i.e. if it's not designed to renew itself then it's
>> not
>> > designed to be "open"
>>
>> I can see your study of energy-flows coming through in this viewpoint.
>>  The claim is "high level" enough to be digested, but is not obvious.
>>
>> How about this variation: Open systems can 'exist' or 'live' or
>> 'survive' without external dependencies.
>>
>> Or even: Open to Live.  Or (more negatively): Open or Die.
>>
>>
>> > There are of course many meaning of "open" and I think the word itself
>> is
>> > subjective.
>> >
>> > That's why I believe we ought to look beyond "open" and "closed" and
>> > consider the optimum model for sustainability and evolution, which would
>> > have a mix of open and closed (or not so open) aspects.
>> >
>> > It's a complex issue indeed which is why it requires a complex answer,
>> not
>> > black or white like closed vs open.
>> >
>>
>> I agree here too.
>>
>> Marc, you say the bigger Free Software projects are not 'open' because
>> of the financial support - and from that the external control over the
>> product.
>>
>> This is partially correct, and I want to discuss where the line is
>> drawn, or in other words, how such projects are 'open' in some ways,
>> while being 'closed' in other ways.  As you say, it is a complex
>> question/answer.
>>
>>
>> The difference appears to me to be a mix of naming (Trademark) and
>> timing (contract against future labor).
>>
>>
>> I think of the "sources" of a software project as the primary "Means
>> of Production" for that product.  It's true they require physical
>> devices (a PC) to create, store and display them, but the low price of
>> this barrier-to-entry causes it to be of little importance for
>> singular-ownership.
>>
>> Therefore, software development, even of giant-funded projects like
>> Firefox and the Linux kernel are partially 'open' to anyone who can
>> afford to purchase or rent a PC and sign-up for a network connection
>> (ISP costs), or can afford to purchase a CD of the *CURRENT* sources
>> through snail-mail.
>>
>>
>> Now, it is true that future production specifically entitled
>> "Firefox(TM) or Linux(TM) or VirtualBox(TM), etc." is temporarily
>> closed during that development period, and the direction of that
>> development under the control of the group owning that Trademark.
>>
>> But that is only true *UNTIL* they make another release.  At that
>> point, the Means of Production (the sources) are again available to
>> anyone receiving the Product (object code).
>>
>> This is the basis and reasoning for 'forking' a project.
>>
>> There is more to say here about the hardware and energy required to
>> 'host' any new fork, but I've already talked too much about that in
>> the past...
>>
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090322/b43fd15a/attachment.html>