[p2p-research] FW: Blogpost: Open Data: Empowering the Empowered or Effective Data Use for Everyone?

[Michael Gurstein]

Thanks Martin, it does make it clearer but I'm not sure based on the below
what conclusion you might draw.

Are you suggesting that restricting access to ICT based data/knowledge is a
good thing because it mitigates the upstream impacts on low income producers
(a rather perverse conclusion I would have thought); or because of a
potentially reduced downstream impact on energy consumption and thus on the
environment (also, but a somewhat less perverse conclusion since the overall
impact of additional ICT use on energy use and thus on the the environment
is probably less than the likely savings in other forms of energy
consumption as a result of the use of the information/data acquired using
the ICTs--less physical travel required, healthier living, additional access
to information concerning alternative energies etc.etc.

M

-----Original Message-----
From: p2presearch-bounces at listcultures.org
[mailto:p2presearch-bounces at listcultures.org] On Behalf Of j.martin.pedersen
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 8:41 AM
To: p2presearch at listcultures.org
Subject: Re: [p2p-research] FW: Blogpost: Open Data: Empowering the
Empowered or Effective Data Use for Everyone?

On 03/09/10 14:46, Michael Gurstein wrote:
> 
> Thanks Martin,
> 
> I'm not sure that I understand the point you are making...

Let me try again - even if a bit quick:

In order to enjoy Open Access one requires access to the means of access,
i.e. technology. Without access to computers and the Internet, Open Access
gives you nothing. Therefore Open Access - if it is empowering - divides
people.

So, let as assume that if you DO have access to computers and the Internet,
Open Access is good for you. In other words, more computers and more
broadband need to be provided if the Open Access argument should be a good
one (without creating a new divide, as you argue).

Then, if we consider that the IT industry is now heavier on the environment
than aviation, thus contributing significantly to climate change,
degradation of water tables, melting of glaciers etc. etc., it becomes
obvious that the proposition above (more computers needed) is impossible
within the current mode of production without an increase in the suffering
caused by that production - that is an environmental justice issue.

Moreover, the people who work within that industry (migrant workers,
low-paid, the children who disassemble the hardware when it is thrown away
in the end etc. etc.) are suffering from all kinds of problems (skin
diseases, cancer etc. etc.), meaning that increasing the production of
hardware - in order to make the Open Access argument work
- will increase the suffering of those who will have to labour for it. That
is the labour solidarity issue.

Does that make it slightly clearer?

-m

_______________________________________________
p2presearch mailing list
p2presearch at listcultures.org
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org