[p2p-research] Fwd: VW's open and transparent Factory in dresden - Germany

[Samuel Rose]

> I interpret spectrum to mean a 'balance between' in regard to personal,
> moment-to-moment, contexts based on environmental conditions, which may
> include other personal, moment-to-moment, contexts based on environmental
> conditions, 'ad infinitum'. (unless you'd rather stay put ;)


"Spectrum" is infinite variation within continuum. (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_(mathematics) )

Complex systems theory shows us that the types of systems that Dante
was describing generally do not lend themselves well at all to being
viewed as a line.

The real nature of the types of systems that Dante was describing is
"non-linear". Non-linear systems are better viewed in non-linear ways
if you really want to glean useful information from data about them.





>> Perhaps people would get paid for not revolting themselves against the
>> status quo of power structures ?  Or perhaps it is cheaper to pay police
>> and
>> army forces to control parts of the population that are not required to
>> service the dominant control/monetary system ?
>
> At least here in the US, there is enough work for at least 40 years
> just re-making the education system :-) Wait until experience some
> more collapses of globalized infrastructure. There's enough work for
> every human on the planet in recreating our artificially globalized
> infrastructure into networks of local systems
> ""
> Law enforcement in the form of a human career is a sign of the weakness of
> narrow linear models produced by a world-view based on competition first,
> collaboration second, if at all: propriety = lack of knowledge =
> protectionism = prison. The person within a market culture live as linear
> minds; reduction before induction; what's in it for me before I give a damn
> about you; and so on. The p2p model is a reversal of sorts, nurturing a
> cyclical mentality, where the most power is noted as produced from the
> external world, and it is addressed first before reflecting on the internal
> self that surfaces after. This may be what Paul Fernhout means by "maturing
> as a society."

What say you of "market cultures" that are configured around
commons-based resources?

Again, using me as an example:

How does it fit for you that people would pay me government currency
to create software and hardware that are given away for others to use
for free?

Why do they do it? Why do I do it? Will it be the same everywhere,
everytime someone does something like this? (it won't)

How does it fit that people would pay me to do this, yet agree to give
away the product of my labor for free?

The idea that anyone who looks like, or is, solving problems by way of
"market culture" is automatically resembling descriptions above isn't
seem to be playing out in reality. In reality, people are solving some
problems with "market culture"-based approaches, and mixing this with
emerging, new approaches. People are transitioning towards
transformation.

> Once universal peer production is established by the socio-technical means


If we do see this, I can guarantee to you that we will never get to
this transformation without transitioning towards it.

What we are doing now, is transitioning towards it.


> Sam, Dante, and I are developing with you (whether you know it or not), how
> we ascert value in such an environment will differ somewhat from the
> regulated marketplace that has brought us this far; but we will still have
> values, a sense of right and wrong, even if those sensibilities are enhanced
> in a culture where difference is more than acceptable, not like before where
> the market society had difficulty in caring for themselves, resorting to
> protective means of intellectual and physical enclosure for self
> preservation within the reductive expanse.
> I quickly grow tired of thinking; of writing; it is useful for a time; but I
> do it more than what is healthy; but such is needed in these times; we must;
> yet I'd much rather be the abstractions they themselves reflect upon.
> Such hollow still, communication
> For it is not the commune
> 'Cation is this gap to bridge
> It is so this sign say
> The whole said place
> Words to rest
> Anything more
> Is never
> Well said:
> ""
> What people are doing is important. Why people are doing what they are
> doing is even more important. Understand why people are doing what
> they are doing, and you can start to see through their worldview a
> little. And, it means you can see how they see the ecologies and
> economies they perceive that they are participating in.
> ""
> Nathan
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, my reply was not about you at all. 100% definitely was not
>> about you. But, was 100% about the model of spectrums that you were
>> proposing that we use.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Dante-Gabryell Monson
>> <dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Sam,
>> > yes, and yes :-)
>> > although initially I did not mean it to be a debate on my own
>> > motivations
>> > and situation ,
>> > but simply some comments encouraging to visualize and position ourselves
>> > along such inter-related spectrum's,
>> > as I notice that there may be differences in vision we ( some people on
>> > this
>> > list ) may be building on according to these various spectrum's.
>> > For example, Paul or Nathan mentioning increased automation, in certain
>> > contexts, ...
>> > And yes, I imagine we can also use such spectrum's to position not only
>> > our
>> > visions, but our current situations :-)
>> > I wanted to use such spectrum's not to limit ourselves into a linear
>> > form,
>> > but to use various linear forms to position them on a multi-dimensional
>> > map/graph of such gradual spectrum's, and also understand the non-linear
>> > relations between these spectrum's ...
>> > So I believe it can resonate with what you seem to express in your last
>> > reply Sam :-)
>> > As for replying in relation to me, here goes ( for anyone interested in
>> > knowing a bit more about Dante :-p  )  :
>> > ---
>> > I also believe that there is no lack of "work".
>> > It all depends how one defines "work".
>> > When I was younger, at school, I asked myself why "the news" was
>> > constantly
>> > worried about "lack of work" when I saw so many things that needed to be
>> > done.  So I understood their concern was about "paid work".  On the
>> > other
>> > hand, I could see that there was so much money in the social background
>> > in
>> > which I grew in. ( not my parents, but the parents of the kids I went to
>> > school with ). I understood it was an issue of decision making and
>> > power.
>> > Today, I understand its about artificial scarcity through , for example,
>> > money hoarding; a need for constantly growing the monetary mass through
>> > debt
>> > as to pay for formerly created debt ( principal ) plus the interest ,
>> > through creating new markets, as to avoid collapse , requiring growth,
>> > including speculative growth ( bubbles ), but only if it leads to
>> > increased
>> > profits and power for the ones that already have power and money.  An
>> > economic system at the service of the status quo of the structures of
>> > power.
>> > And so my own question becomes :
>> > When power structures who have access to monetary creation ( through
>> > debt )
>> > will have their needs satisfied without needing to pay a majority of the
>> > population , how can the ones outside of the needs of a monetary system
>> > servicing the power structures best reclaim inter-dependence
>> > ---
>> > As for "paid work", yes, its a lot about "effective communication",
>> > "selling" our work to individuals or organizations that have access to
>> > resources ( including, as you say, non monetary resources ) ,
>> > organizations
>> > of individuals that may see an interest in it.
>> > I guess this is how I was given the laptop computer on which I currently
>> > write.
>> > But I do not see this as a structural solution.
>> > There are various approaches...
>> > I believe in support at the level of peers...
>> > I want to participate in the development of a radical solution, by
>> > trying to
>> > envision and implement a software supporting human based computation
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-based_computation
>> > Although I am not a programmer, I am thinking about this kind of
>> > solution (
>> > draft ) :
>> > http://cashwiki.org/en/DebttoIntention
>> > As for me, my motivation , and my living strategy, after spending
>> > several
>> > years of roaming around by hitch hiking,
>> > is to re-converge locally, building up social networks and capital
>> > locally,
>> > continue learning and connecting people interested in collaborating
>> > locally,
>> > increasing autonomy through distributed inter-dependence,
>> > and inspiring myself from what you are doing.
>> > As I re-establish myself locally, I have more stability to find out
>> > about
>> > funding opportunities, and potentially create local partnerships to fund
>> > raise.  This mailing list and all the converging work and inspirations
>> > from
>> > the people on this list can empower me in setting up a clear vision for
>> > implementations at various levels of abstraction :-)
>> > Greetings from Brussels :-)
>> > Dante
>> > http://hitchwiki.org/en/Dante
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dante, I like your style, but I have a few counterpoints to some of
>> >> this.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Dante-Gabryell Monson
>> >> <dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > I agree.  There are a number of important differentiations.
>> >> > Or rather, I d like to see it as a number of "spectrum's" which
>> >> > ideally
>> >> > could be visualized in a multidimensional graph :-)
>> >> > See below in bold for a few spectrum's I notice in our conversation,
>> >> > and feel free to suggest added related spectrum's...
>> >> > Perhaps we could use it to make graphical representations and situate
>> >> > ourselves ?
>> >> > ----
>> >> >
>> >> > The first one you reacted to is paid work vs unpaid work.
>> >> > ( or perhaps also "pay to work" ? )
>> >> > "What is work" ? What is "paid work" ?
>> >> > What is "paid work" in the current dominant monetary paradigm ?
>> >> > And how is "work" recognized in potential other economic systems ?
>> >> > ( does it still need to be recognized ? will we pay to have our work
>> >> > recognized ? such as students in universities ? - unless they are
>> >> > paid
>> >> > for
>> >> > working on their Phd -  )
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I think these are good questions. I'd also like to add: *Why* are you
>> >> doing this work? Are you doing it for the pay?
>> >>
>> >> What people are doing is important. Why they are doing what they are
>> >> doing is vital to understanding the system they see themselves as
>> >> being part of.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > If power structures do not need workers anymore, I imagine it is
>> >> > unlikely a
>> >> > majority of the population would get paid for working for what
>> >> > machines
>> >> > could make cheaper, faster, and without questioning authority.
>> >>
>> >> If machines do the work that we do now, we'll  turn our attentions to
>> >> new types of work (maybe figuring out how to turn all of mass around
>> >> us into computers and digital storage). Or, a dystopian outcome is:
>> >> freed up from the need to labor for survival, we turn on each
>> >> other....
>> >>
>> >> > Perhaps people would get paid for not revolting themselves against
>> >> > the
>> >> > status quo of power structures ?  Or perhaps it is cheaper to pay
>> >> > police
>> >> > and
>> >> > army forces to control parts of the population that are not required
>> >> > to
>> >> > service the dominant control/monetary system ?
>> >>
>> >> At least here in the US, there is enough work for at least 40 years
>> >> just re-making the education system :-) Wait until experience some
>> >> more collapses of globalized infrastructure. There's enough work for
>> >> every human on the planet in recreating our artificially globalized
>> >> infrastructure into networks of local systems
>> >>
>> >> > Or perhaps its even "cheaper" ( in terms of coercive control ) to
>> >> > eradicate
>> >> > such populations that would become to create their own systems and
>> >> > become
>> >> > too autonomous ?
>> >> > If we tend towards such a situation, I find it interesting to
>> >> > understand
>> >> > how
>> >> > to create an alternative economy where it is possible to produce for
>> >> > ourselves, preferably by using existing technologies.
>> >> > I already feel I am in such a situation : I do not seem to be
>> >> > servicing
>> >> > direct needs of the status quo of power structures, so as a result I
>> >> > am
>> >> > not
>> >> > paid for trying to change it.
>> >>
>> >> My approach is to convince them to try something really, really
>> >> different, and get them to fund that. It's up to you how you ask to be
>> >> funded. You can ask for money, or you could ask for them to give you a
>> >> piece of land, and enough materials to build a structure on it. etc
>> >> etc
>> >>
>> >> I think that "spectrum" could be intepreted by some people as meaning
>> >> "from one extreme to another". A finite range, with linear progression
>> >> from one end to another. And so, the inevitble question becomes "where
>> >> you you on this spectrum?"
>> >>
>> >> What if I get payed to produce things that people do not pay for?
>> >> Where do I fit on this spectrum? Where on the spectrum is the model of
>> >> convincing people who rely on enclosed resources to invest in creating
>> >> common pool resources that they participate in co-managing and using?
>> >> This is a picture of what I do.
>> >>
>> >> I want to advocate that there are more possibilities than may be
>> >> apparent if you view the picture through a "spectrum" of
>> >> possibilities. The actual nature of the system is non-linear, and so
>> >> it is not easy to see it through a linear lens.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> --
>> >> Sam Rose
>> >> Social Synergy
>> >> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>> >> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>> >> skype: samuelrose
>> >> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>> >> http://socialsynergyweb.com
>> >> http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing
>> >> http://flowsbook.panarchy.com/
>> >> http://socialmediaclassroom.com
>> >> http://localfoodsystems.org
>> >> http://notanemployee.net
>> >> http://communitywiki.org
>> >>
>> >> "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
>> >> ambition." - Carl Sagan
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Sam Rose
>> Social Synergy
>> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
>> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
>> skype: samuelrose
>> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
>> http://socialsynergyweb.com
>> http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing
>> http://flowsbook.panarchy.com/
>> http://socialmediaclassroom.com
>> http://localfoodsystems.org
>> http://notanemployee.net
>> http://communitywiki.org
>>
>> "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
>> ambition." - Carl Sagan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
http://socialsynergyweb.com
http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing
http://flowsbook.panarchy.com/
http://socialmediaclassroom.com
http://localfoodsystems.org
http://notanemployee.net
http://communitywiki.org

"The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
ambition." - Carl Sagan