Message 02835 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT02752 Message: 9/123 L5 [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] New economic model for free technology?

Dear Franz, Stefan:

Sorry, the previous message was sent before I was

Has there be any discussion on the basic income, as a
necessary precondition for the development of Peer
production? What has been the discussion?

To preserve 'peer production' as such, the basic
income is the only solution I see to create the
independence of the producers, but it will probably
never cover the full needs.

Therefore, following Fiske's fourfold intersubjective
typology, i.e. the modes that have always existed
across time and space, we still need solutions for the
other 3 spheres:

 - for reciprocity-based relations, we need
complementary currencies

 - for market pricing, I think that a form of
'distributed capitalism', where producers are not
dependent on scarce money managed by monopolies, such
a  scheme will still be useful

 - finally, the state, as representative of the
authoritarian principle, can play a role by providing
funding for collaborative projects (say ,fund
solutions for clean cars or whatever).

For peer production to succeed or expand, I think we

1) the basic income for pure P2P in the immaterial

2) to split immaterial design from material production
through funding by the state or distributed capital

3) for pure material production, the existence of
distributed capital pools seem even more necessary.

Don't misunderstand me, we do need a sphere for pure
non-reciprocal production to exist, through the
universal basic income (or what are the other
alternatives?), but if we want to expand cooperative
production generally (not necessarily non-reciprocal),
the other schemes will be necessary.

Michel Bauwens

--- Franz Nahrada <f.nahrada> wrote:

Stefan Mertten schrieb am Dienstag, 27. September
2005 um 17:45 +0100:

When I think of an Oekonuxian perspective I find
this a bad approach
because it reintroduces the alienation of the money
system back into
Free Projects. It is the customer / boss who says
what is good and
what not. At least for software if this would be
the best way to do
things than M$ would need to have no fear of Free
Software. In other
words: The quality of things produced without this
type of alienation
is higher than with alienation.

Hi Stefan, we have shortly discussed these things
as we noticed  I see that differently. maybe I
should explain:

I see that what Karel is developing is a kind of
He sets the goal and looks for people to support it.

You cannot equal that with a situation where 
"the boss sets the goal". 
And you can hardly compare this with a situation
"the customer sets the goal". 
Frithjof Bergman has rightly called the latter the
"slavery to the market" and I think you are right by
putting it into one category with employment.
But Karels benefactors are not necessarily his
I think this makes a lot of difference.
I think that possibility should be part of an
Oekonuxian perspective....
there might be faster development if we can also
live on what we really
really want to do.

The deeper reason is that if you create a good for
nothing else than
its use value than you can create the very best
thing thinkable. This
mode of production also attracts bright engineers
because this is what
they want to do deep down in their hearts.

If you want to create something very good, and you
lack the time and resources to do it,
why should it not be logical to publish the request

Hardware development might mean prototyping,
material costs etc.

But the going gets tougher for all people. We all
experience the situation
that we do not have enough time and energy to do
what we really want. I
personally suffer from that and I would like very
much that someone would
buy me time to work even harder on the things that I
consider necessary.

So to get back to your example allow me this
question: When you
furthered the development of Ronja did you ever
think of what could
bring in (more) money? If so were there a point
where these thoughts
were more important than technical and useage

At least we can bring our theoretical troubles and
voids to a very
empirical point here. I am very eager to read Karels


Contact: projekt

Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT02752 Message: 9/123 L5 [In index]
Message 02835 [Homepage] [Navigation]