[p2p-research] Post-Capitalism

Tue Jul 13 17:53:17 CEST 2010

A Crude Timeframe for Innovation

Next 2-4 years.  Universities begin to die wholesale through massive
government cut-backs.  R&D goes to the garages in huge numbers.

Next 4-8 years.  Wiki-like repositories of design projects and mechanics for
sythesizing everything from green transport vehicles to simple drugs start
to emerge.

Next 8-12 years...governments regularly fail based on financial collapse of
soverign debt.  This will start in Europe and spread quickly to Asia and
North America.

Next 12-15 years.  The capacity of homebrew biology products like new
organs, limbs, and rebuilt arteries, etc. will make longevity far less
problematic for the rich (top 20% of the world)...we on this list are all
rich.

Next 15-20 years...Last of the large for profit industries find it difficult
to operate in a world where rapid movements to free P2P networks are
commonplace and very disrespectful of intellectual property.

Next 20-25 years...humans become largely irrelevant.  Singularity and
robotic technology makes non human hybrids irrelevant...rather like hobby
farm animals.

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> I agree with Ryan re his points on participative innovation,
>
> the question is, what are the industrial effects of participative
> innovation?
>
> the answer is: there is really no crucial difference, yes they are rival
> goods, but, anything that needs to be made, needs to be designed, and thus
> falls under the possiblity of open innovation,
>
> more interestingly for me is that once open design communities take hold,
> they are also designing the production process differently, which gives rise
> to the new forms of distributed manufacturing that are described in our
> wiki,
>
> of course, this emergence of open and distributed manufacturing will take
> more time (more capital needed, more integration between the physical and
> the virtual, many collaborative tools are still missing in many sectors),
> but it is precisely this necessity, which weds the corporate world, to the
> world of shared design, and makes it co-evolve with it,
>
> that a development is marginal only matters to a degree, what matters is
> the direction of the evolution, and from my vantage point, it is happening,
> and I agree with Ryan's time frame on this, i.e. 20-30 years, but that
> doesn't mean its effects are not visible long before that ..
>
> Michel
>
>   On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Dan:
>>
>> Arguing with Marxists is very similar to arguing with anyone who believes
>> strongly in their point of view.  Personally, I see little evidence to
>> support Marxism any time I've made admittedly minimal efforts to understand
>> it.  As I am inclined to work with and use things that are evidential, I
>> have never seen any reason to seriously engage Marxism any more than I
>> do have reason to engage others systems or beliefs that are minimally
>> evidential.  That said, some very smart people have used Marxism as a basis
>> of analysis particularly in sociology and history.  I don't diss it as a
>> sort of theory of how the world works much from those academic traditions.
>> It isn't useful as economics or social policy so far as I can tell.  It also
>> isn't in any way a good predictor of social evolution.  I think Marx meant
>> well.  State implementations of his theories have been uniformly disasterous
>> in my opinion.  Others can certainly disagree, but I think an objective
>> viewer would find most instances of Marxism in practice to be worse than
>> mere failures.
>>
>> You ask is innovation possible in a post-capitalist world.  I suspect it
>> is not only possible but it will accelerate.  What is killing capitalism
>> is technology.  Technology is rapidly encroaching on the mind and the body
>> as to how humans can control and own reasoning.  This is not a bad thing.
>> Personally, I'd much rather trust a system that was built and vetted by
>> thousands of doctors and nurses than the ideas of one human.  Soon, that
>> sort of collective, social technology will be commonplace.  Elements have
>> already begun.  Your field, learning, is all important.  Soon there will be
>> a greater synergy between machine learning and human learning.  This is all
>> but inevitable unless some cataclysm freezes us where we are or in a lower
>> state of progress.
>>
>> Innovation requires a sort of willingness to trial.  Trials and
>> experiments are typically expensive and hard.  In a post capitalist society
>> (one where debt driven growth is not the norm) it may be less risky to try
>> things.  This will give even further impetus to innovation in co-ops, maker
>> faires, garage-level manufacturing, etc.  I think all that stuff is very
>> very exciting.  Anyone who does not have a still or a CNC router or a set of
>> test tubes in the garage right now is really missing out on what is most
>> exciting about our times...it is the democratization of R&D...and that is
>> the most important driver of innovation of all.  Don't get me wrong, we are
>> still in the corporate age and will be for 20-30 more years at least.
>> The change is started though.  Many of the people on this list are doing
>> it.  That's why I am here.  The associated Marxism is not helpful, but I'm
>> unlikely to convince those of that inclination of that nor are they likely
>> to convince me.  In general, it is better, as Michel has said, to seek out
>> common ground.  I find Marxian influenced people, like people of any strong
>> metaphysical view, have great difficulty finding common ground, however.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Daniel Araya <levelsixmedia at hotmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Ryan, one question I have for you: Do you think there is room for
>>> continuous innovation in 'capitalist' post-industrial economies? If so
>>> innovation in what areas? Green energy? Or are we in the early phases of a
>>> post-capitalist commons-based era?
>>>
>>> What is your view (ignoring all the Marxist fog)...?
>>>
>>> D
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:03:48 +0700
>>> From: michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>>> To: p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> Subject: Re: [p2p-research] The problems of debt
>>>
>>> Hi Ryan,
>>>
>>> when do you place item 8, I think this would be crucial in your theory,
>>>
>>> if you place it in 2008, then obviously, this is right,
>>>
>>> but if you place it before, it's totally against the historical record,
>>> as debt and credit is precisely the strategy that was chosen to jumpstart
>>> the economy, i.e. the social product going to labour was dramatically
>>> diminished, forcing the middle class to resort to debt-fuelled lifestyles
>>> ... It is the collapse of this strategy that led to the meltdown of 2008 and
>>> the death of the neoliberal model (but not of the power of the elite that
>>> sustained those policies, as you rightly say, they were 'saved' and remain
>>> in place)
>>>
>>> as any enterpreneur or capitalist knows, in real production, profit only
>>> comes from monopoly, i.e. preventing as long as possible that innovations
>>> are shared, once this happens, super-profits become impossible, and start
>>> declining very rapidly; this is of course why IP is crucial,
>>>
>>> in a world of open and social innovation therefore, and I think this is
>>> happening, profit tends to be distributed much faster, and therefore
>>> declines much faster,
>>>
>>> as you can see in the RSA animate presentation by David Harvey, and this
>>> is confirmed by The Big Shift of Hagel/seely brown, production-based profit
>>> has dramatically declined, and only financial rent is now providing profit,
>>> or at least it was until 2008
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>> I've been asked to explain debt problems as influenced by technology.
>>> I'll try.
>>>
>>> Here's my "theory".  Many others share or have versions of something
>>> similar.  I claim no originality.  I've posted several versions on this
>>> list.
>>>
>>> 1. Growth occurs when someone produces something others value.  The sum
>>> total of value is the economy.
>>> 2. In the past, it was a matter of work and labour to produce something
>>> of value...like digging a hole where a hole was wanted.
>>> 3. People learned to take money that was not in use and to use it by
>>> borrowing it and then buying value-production which was then placed on sale.
>>> 4. The process of 3 entails risk.  Risk was rewarded by profit.
>>> 5. The system of 3-4 really works quite well so long as profit is likely.
>>> 6. In a world where learning and high productive machinery requiring low
>>> skill levels is readily available (i.e. post 1990 or so) making profit is
>>> harder.  7. Item 6 is especially true if innovation is not protected by the
>>> state (e.g. through intellectual property.)
>>> 8. Because profit is harder especially in tangible goods and services
>>> (because of technology and learning distribution) credit is harder.
>>> 9. When credit became hard, the incentives to cheat increased.  People
>>> lent money badly and then cleverly sold the bad loans to others who didn't
>>> understand.
>>> 10. When 9 happened, the state had to decide whether huge firms
>>> fulfilling important institutional roles would die, or be saved.
>>> 11. Nearly all states, especially in Japan and Europe, chose to save old
>>> institutions (e.g. Royal Bank of Scotland), or in the US, AIG.
>>> 12. There is now an open question as to whether markets can still create
>>> value (e.g. the iPod) in such a way that debt is justified.  If not,
>>> capitialism in the form that creates ready growth through using unused money
>>> is screwed.
>>> 13. When money goes unused, it is difficult to create new money and
>>> growth of value.  There is no/little incentive to innovate.  This can be
>>> called "deflation."
>>> 14. Deflation is more dangerous to capitalism by far than inflation.
>>> Deflation means shrinkage of an economy because unused money becomes more
>>> valuable by sitting than by being used.  Thus, people become even more risk
>>> averse.
>>> 15. When 14 happens for a long time (e.g. Japan) then demographic and
>>> institutional patterns start to become unsustainable.
>>> 16. When 15 happens, we do not understand the long term outcomes, but
>>> they don't seem good.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ryan Lanham
>>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>>> P.O. Box 633
>>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>>> Cayman Islands
>>> (345) 916-1712
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  -
>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>
>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>
>>> Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with
>>> Hotmail. Get busy.<http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ryan Lanham
>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>> P.O. Box 633
>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>> Cayman Islands
>> (345) 916-1712
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>

-- 
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
Cayman Islands
(345) 916-1712
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100713/5ab1035f/attachment.html>