[p2p-research] some considerations

[Michel Bauwens]

Dear Marco,

I assume you won't mind if I share this with our community, see
http://p2pfoundation.net/Difference_Between_Shared_Code_for_Immaterial_Production_and_Shared_Design_for_Material_Production
and
I also will publish it on the blog

I essentially agree, however, despite the differences, there are
commonalities, which I believe lead essentially to the same basic
relationship between community-commons, enterpreneurial coalition, and
cooperation infrastructure management entity,

see here for the basic idea:
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/open-design-communities-entrepreneurial-coalitions-and-the-partner-state/2009/09/04

more articles on the differences/commonalities:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Design#Key_Arguments

 Key Arguments for the Benefits of Shared
Designs<http://p2pfoundation.net/Key_Arguments_for_the_Benefits_of_Shared_Designs>
Summary by Kevin Carson: Expanding Peer Production to the Physical
World<http://p2pfoundation.net/Expanding_Peer_Production_to_the_Physical_World>
The economics of open
hardware<http://antipastohw.blogspot.com/2009/02/zen-and-art-of-open-source-hardware.html>(Liquid
Antipasto blog)
Can we shift from open software to open hardware? a) Can peer production
make washing machines?<http://p2pfoundation.net/Can_peer_production_make_washing_machines%3F>.
Graham Seaman; b) Open Source outside the Domain of
Software<http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/0262562278chapm2.pdf>.
Clay Shirky; c) Why Open
Hardware?<http://p2pfoundation.net/Why_Open_Hardware%3F>by Patrick
McNamara.
In peer production, the interests of capitalists and entrepreneurs are no
longer aligned<http://p2pfoundation.net/In_peer_production,_the_interests_of_capitalists_and_entrepreneurs_are_no_longer_aligned>
Dave Pollard on the fallacy of the Economies of
Scale<http://p2pfoundation.net/Economies_of_Scale>argument, i.e. that
bigger is better.
What are the specific difficulties for Open
Hardware<http://p2pfoundation.net/What_are_the_specific_difficulties_for_Open_Hardware>?

Design for sustainability is inherently
participatory<http://p2pfoundation.net/Design_for_sustainability_is_inherently_participatory>
Can we design our economic policies and politics for developing abundance?
See Roberto Verzola on Undermining vs. Developing
Abundance<http://p2pfoundation.net/Roberto_Verzola_on_Undermining_vs._Developing_Abundance>
David A. Mellis: How Open Source Hardware differs from Open Source
Software<http://p2pfoundation.net/How_Open_Source_Hardware_differs_from_Open_Source_Software>?


On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 4:26 PM, magius <magius at magius.info> wrote:

> Michel,
>
> Let me make some theorical considerations about open production. Imho
> the two big differences between immaterial production (ip) and
> material production (mp) now are:
>
> 1. design/product
>
> 1.1 in ip, the design and the product are the same (code is an
> "executive design")
>
> 1.2 in mp the design and the product are not the same (code need a
> material productive system - industry - to be transformed in a
> product).
>
> 2. designers/producers
>
> 2.1 in ip cause design and product are the same, is possible to create
> a community of designers/producers (coders) that share freely
> products, in which members have an "implicit agreement" to use the
> shared knowledge to improve continuously the product, for the benefit
> of all the community members. members can earn income from services
> related to the product (i.e. software customization) continuously
> improved by community.
>
> 2.1.1 basicly software coding is a pre-industrial system! coder is an
> artisan, because product design and product production are not
> separated (work alienation in marxism)
>
> 2.1.2 the role of money is not significant in such community
> (apparenty..the knowledge sharing tools - the internet - are
> apparently free, but their existence is based on material production
> of products - computers - needed to make working the infrastructure)
>
> 2.2. in mp cause design and product are not the same, is possible to
> create a community of designers but to be effective as the ip
> communities, you need to have inside also producers (industry). in
> such community can be shared the design but imho members cannot earn
> income from services related only to design, cause the value is made
> by product.
>
> 2.2.1 the role of money is significant, it's related to investments
> needed to start a material production to transform projects in
> products
>
> 2.2.2 in mp the community will change his meaning only when will start
> massively the self-replicating personal industry (reprap), so design
> and product will be the same.
>
> in the meantime we need to find a different approach. isnt it?
>
> 2010/7/15 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>:
> > one more thing,
> >
> > have a look at the licensing scheme of arduino, the shared circuit board
> > design project, via "Massimo Banzi" <m.banzi at tinker.it>,
> >
> > see http://arduino.cc/blog/?p=615
> >
> > as I understand it, everyone can make the boards, but cannot use the
> brand
> > name unless they pay a license to get the documentation, etc...
>



-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100717/3b4ab2b6/attachment.html>