[p2p-research] ?? trends ? : "Corporate Dropouts" towards Open diy ? ... ?!

[Nathan Cravens]

Hello Dante,

Sounds like a fun meeting you had. Brussels is beautiful looking place.
http://images.google.com/images?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS252&q=Brussels&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

The writing below is interesting, but irritating to my U.S. mass production,
division of labor-centric mentality. . .

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Dante-Gabryell Monson <
dante.monson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Somehow, after having a look at this link on "Globalization and Income
> Distribution <http://www.nber.org/papers/w14643.pdf>"
> (  pdf : http://fmwww.bc.edu/ec-p/wp699.pdf - see more with excerpts
> further below )
>
> I ask myself *how local economic systems based on diy open manufacturing
> would impact allocation **of skills ?*
>

A web crawler aggregates skills onto a 'search results' page (like Alta
Vista ;p) with e-mail contacts so people can contact them; those that use
the program will inform the person unaware of the list and make use of that
list. If skills are rare, this means a market must be in place at some
level, but the crawler is able to organize names and skills so well that
skills will default the market as gift activity exceeds market demand.

I have a document on the back-burner that describes this in slightly more
detail, but it remains rough, as I'm working the materials side at the
moment.

*
> *
> *And how this compares or interacts with current globalized cognitive
> capitalism.*
>

What's cognitive capitalism dere partner? I just sold your entire mind
wholesale to the highest bidder, so never mind, its no longer yours to use
to describe cognitive capitalism.


> *
> *
> *Would there also be concentrations of skilled workers ? ( such as current
> concentrations  in certain businesses ? )*
>

Businesses are established for those that do not have skills or unfit to
manage themselves?
We're just not there yet are we? My theoretical abstractions say we are. :p


> *
> *
> *Is there a potential scenario for a brain drain from corporations to
> intentional peer producing networks ?*
> *
> *
>
They suck ;p


> **
> *Is such process already happening ?*
> ( or is it currently mainly from corporations to self-owned small companies
> ? )
>

Yeah. The suck is exponential.

*
> *
> *What are the alliances we are currently seeing ? *
> *
> *
> Can part-time , non-paid ( in mainstream money ) "hobby" work
> in open, diy, collaborative convergence spaces
> become an *argument for long term material security of the participating
> peer* towards he's/her family ?
>

If you have to work a paying job to support a family; that is not a family
in my opinion; that is relational slavery.


>
> *Do we have a "Quit Work Slavery" Kit ready for use ?*
> *
> *
>

Yeah. Its called the world wide web.


> **
> *---*
> *
> *
> Hacker spaces seem to be convergence spaces for open source programmers,
> and possibly more and more other artists,
> open manufacturing, diy permaculture, ... ?
>

Yes. I'm really interested in meeting other artists in the hacker space
environment. They are fertile ground for placing distributed server farms
from membership fees and eventually for free using open materials, land use,
and instructional documentation as an alternative to Google everything. I'm
going to discuss this with the folk at the CCC this year to see if they're
ready. I will share my skills of drumming and poetics freely. ;)


>
> Can we expect a "Massive Corporate Dropout"... to drain into such diy
> convergence and interaction spaces ?
>

They got all our 'grain', so yes. ;p (e.g. David Hackett 'The Great Wave')

>
> *Can "Corporate Dropouts" help financing new open p2p infrastructures ?*
>

Because they mostly have air instead of grain, perhaps not in the service
centric demographics. We need a finance connected to existing materials, not
air, one that can tolerate decreased earnings as conditions become abundant
by means of more advanced p2p methods. This means a new currency
infrastructure is needed, an alternative currency, in the form of a basic
income for demographics that are technologically saturated or unfit for
work. (e.g. Japan)


>
> Is there an increase of part-time "Corporates", working part time in open
> p2p ?
>

'Wikinomics' describes how corporations are adopting p2p practices. But that
describes the largest full time corporates. That read is disturbing; for
one; millions of dollars went to waste in research when it could have gone
to researching open development that does not require "pay to know."  Small
business has grown thanks to p2p aspects of the web.

http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Business


>
> Would such a transition , potentially part time "co-working / co-living "
> space be a convergence "model" and scenario some of us would consider
> working on ?
>
>
I'm down. :)


> Do some of us already experience such lifestyle ?
> *
> *
>

I'm staying with a friend before leaving for Manchester just as
the weather became nasty for outdoor living conditions. He goes into the
toilscape to work and school (prison x2! at least). I stay here to read what
my people are jargoning about, hack the theory, keep the house clean, walk
the back roads, admire the horses but not the enclosed fields, and cook my
boy good meals.

**
> *
> *
> *some more context *:
>
> I remember that one of the difficulties google's human resources department
> is having,
> is that even though they may be offering a context that makes google listed
> as one of the best employers,
> some of their skilled employees sometimes prefer leaving their job at
> google to set up their own business.
>
> http://delicious.com/deliciousdante/google+jobs
>

The best will.


>
> " Though Google almost always wins talent wars with the likes of Microsoft
> and Yahoo, its twin HR demons are *startups and retirement*. "
>
> after searching the web, I notice its called "*Corporate Dropouts*".
>
> In a 1993 article :
>
> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1563/is_n2_v12/ai_13990649/
>
> excerpt : *" Why work for someone else when you can work for yourself?
> That's what a lot of people are asking these days, ..."*
> *
> *
>

Little devils!


> **
> It leads me back to the "vectors" we may have mentioned in a previous
> thread ( the VW dresden thread , on p2pr list  ) :
>
> *What vectors motivate us ? *
> **( how much does a need for security, and all other needs in maslow's
> hierarchy, influence our choices ? )
> *What lifestyle do we choose for ?*
> *What form of governance do we choose for,*
> *and what can currently empower ( or dis-empower ) such choices ? *
> *
> *
>

I just hear jargon dere partner.


> **
>
> I guess it also related to a face to face discussion I had with a small
> group of people in Brussels following the initiative of Manfred - minutes :
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AdJHqFvEd3IfZGd2enZxZGRfNTBjNXpubmNtaw&hl=en
>

hehe:
""
Unattractive recruitment adverts: "We are the market leader in the sector
XYZ with an annual turn-over of ..." has nothing to do with the lifestyle of
young people.
""
 ...Or the best parts of people in general.



> which lead Jaime to share links related to "Why do high potentials avoid
> large organizations ?"
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/imaging-the-hub/browse_thread/thread/a740100179528454/caf7f264da3234a7?lnk=gst&q=jaime#caf7f264da3234a7
>

Cuz when you're smarty pants you likes your autonomy. That don't require
volumes to understand. :p


>
> ---
>
> I personally observe some of my friends working for money as little as
> possible, sometimes on or two months a year, and spend the rest of their
> time working on their own projects.
>
>
Yar!


> I realize that the free time they have makes them reflect and make choices
> about their lifestyle and what they wish to contribute to.
>
>
We need to put them in prison to teach those bums a lesson!


> It also reminds me of this link to the " Disciplined Minds<http://disciplinedminds.tripod.com/>" book that one of you shared with me, or through the list :
>
> " Jeff Schmidt shows that professional work is inherently political, and
> that professionals are hired to subordinate their own vision and maintain
> strict ideological discipline. "
>
>
PROFIT IS GOD!!!!!!



Nathan



> -----------------------------------
> -----------------------------------
>
> I feel like leaving some excerpts of this economic overview :
>
> *
> *
> *"Globalization is often thought to have increased inequality. The model
> of*
> *this paper delivers the stark result that globalization raises inequality
> in both*
> *North and South. Globalization is also commonly thought to have increased
> *
> *personal income risk."*
> *
> *
> *http://www.nber.org/papers/w14643.pdf*
> *
> *
> *Pdf available on :*
> *
> *
> *http://fmwww.bc.edu/ec-p/wp699.pdf*
> * Globalization and Income Distribution: A Specific Factors Continuum
> Approach *
> *
> *
> *  Some more excerpts :
>
>    " resource reallocation between firms within sectors in this paper is
> driven by a Darwinian gale blowing through the sectoral factor market. When
> paired with wage bargaining, the model can explain why larger and more pro-
> ductive firms pay higher wages for skilled labor. "
> " A more novel result shows that in the presence of aggregate productivity
> shocks, globalization reduces the variance of the factoral terms of trade
> and
> hence the dispersion of personal incomes."
>
> "   Globalization widens income inequality
> in each country, raising the top, lowering the bottom and narrowing the
> middle. Viewed ex ante, the model formalizes the popular sense that per-
> sonal incomes are more risky in globalizing world with purely idiosyncratic
> productivity shocks.
>     When productivity shocks include an economy-wide component that shifts
> relative productivity between countries, there is a countervailing effect
> on in-
> come risk. "
>
> "     Section 1 presents the basic production model. Section 2 derives the
> global equilibrium of the two trading countries. Section 3 deals with the
> equilibrium comparative statics of the model. Section 4 derives the
> distribu-
> tional implications. Section 5 derives efficient ex ante allocation of the
> specific
> factor. Section 6 analyzes heterogeneous firms within sectors. Sections 7
> and
> 8 conclude with speculation on extensions to dynamics and empirical work. "
>
> "      A key distributional property of the model is that the average
> skill pre-
> mium gK /w - 1 is independent of international equilibrium forces. The av-
> erage skill premium rises with the skill bias of technology (α) and falls
> with
> relative skill abundance (K/L). The wage rate is given by
>                            w = gL = α(K/L)1-α G "
>
> "       More general neoclassical
> production functions in the specific factors setting imply that the average
> skill premium may rise or fall in both North and South due to globaliza tion,(*10)
> depending on whether the average skill intensity of production rises
> or falls. The Appendix develops the details and argues that with CES pro-
> duction functions the skill premium ordinarily rises (falls) as the
> elasticity of
> substitution is less (greater) than one.
> (*10)      Linkage between openness and capital accumulation or technology
> will also violate the
> invariance property. "
>
>
> *
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20091013/77fe940d/attachment-0001.html>