Message 00267 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT00265 Message: 3/54 L2 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

RE: [ox-en] Threads "The Fading Altruism of Open Source" on <nettime>



Hello all,

Keith has forwarded your latest messages about open money and i have just joined the forum. I have been working with Michael Linton developing community money systems for almost 7 years. I am a community activist by nature and technologically challenged - i just use the programs that you people create and i thank you all.

It is interesting that we tend to focus our attention on the possibility that people will somehow abuse the system and default on payments rather than the opposite. As Keith said in an earlier post, we naturally tend to "mimic the dominant model" when thinking about community currencies. It's like applying how we feel about microsoft to linux. It just doesn't compute.

The reality is that some people die owing money. In the scarce money world if i die owing you, you have lost the money. In the cc world, if i die with a negative balance - ie in commitment - you have lost nothing. You are not deprived of the means of exchange and neither is anybody else.

At 02:46 PM 1/15/2[PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], Felix Stalder wrote:

But the main issue is see concerns the question of trust.

Trust is such a difficult concept - i mean, who do you trust? anyone over 30? or no one? All you really need to know in order to do business with me is whether i will honour my commitment to provide and that becomes apparent soon enough. If i don't, you can have the payment reversed and my reputation is tarnished. In a small network or community that can be a serious problem. In a large community it takes longer for such information to get around, but eventually it will. You can always check on my balance of trade to see if i am way too far in the negative for you to feel comfortable doing business with me.

Some systems will want much higher levels of security and authentication when dealing with large amounts but there is no need to encumber all cc systems with unnecessary baggage. As you say...

 I agree with the
Keith that there must be multiple LETS systems, because their main
advantage is that they can be highly flexible and adapted to their
community's specific needs and characteristics.


And each of us can choose the kinds of systems that suit our needs, just like joining email conferences. Some are wide open free-for-alls and others are heavily managed, but you decide which ones you want to use and to what extent.

As for smart cards, they are just one of the ways to move the money around - like cash money in a wallet. Much less expensive than using paper scrip - less than $10 for cards and much less in large quantities. Currently, smart card transactors in small quantities are $150 for point-of-sale machines and $100 for battery operated gizmos that look like calculators. http://www.gis.co.uk/prods_1.htm Eventually, cell phones and other electronic devices will enable faster and cheaper payments - online, directly through your account.

Those without access to such technology can use paper, like traveller's cheques and record sheets at businesses. The original LETSystem in the Comox Valley still operates with a phone line, answering machine, and someone to enter the transactions in a spreadsheet at less than 25 cents per transaction.

Right now, smart cards are the preferred means for payments made in shops where ease of use and time spent are serious issues. Here in the Comox Valley, Canada, about 20 retail businesses have been using smart cards for the last two years.

ernie yacub
www.openmoney.org

_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/


Thread: oxenT00265 Message: 3/54 L2 [In index]
Message 00267 [Homepage] [Navigation]