Message 04414 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04409 Message: 6/19 L4 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

[ox-en] Re: [ox-en] DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT - CfC for the conference - DRAFT DRAFTDRAFT




On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:45:32 [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], Gregers Petersen <gp.ioa cbs.dk> wrote:
Michel Bauwens wrote:

In the sharing economy, users are still creating and sharing use value,
but using proprietary platforms.

Can't say that I agree on this distinction - I have before made some
comments in regard to 'sharing cultures' (which also in essence have to
be recognized as 'economical systems'), and I don't really see the
argument for including any notion of proprietary platforms (unless you
somehow place your notion into some kind of step-by-step evolutionary
argument)?

Hi Michel, Gregers.

I have trouble with Michel's position here as well, for me it is too 
categorical (sharing is sharing) and not sufficiently dialectic 
(one form vs another).

These "proprietary systems of sharing" did not appear ex nihilo out
the imagination of TechCrunch readers, but rather where deliberately
built and funded, therefore we must look at what alternatives where
possible, and indeed already available, and why the choice was made
to fund centralized, proprietary systems instead of P2P, free systems.

This choice was made with the logic of Capalist, and not Peer 
social relations.

When compared to systems of sharing from the earlier generation of 
Internet platforms, email, usenet and irc, systems where development
is being systematically neglected in the hope they will die, 
imo, what is striking about the new platforms is not the sharing, 
which was already happening, but rather the centralization, 
propriety, and exclusivity of moderation.

I also endorse Greger's understanding of "sharing cultures" as 
"economic systems," and thus must inevitably understand these 
developments as a reaction against peer production, not for it, 
reasserting capitalist social relations, and thus see these 
proprietary platforms as a step backward,  not forwards.

Other technologies being systematically neglected because
they promote decentralization are IPV6 and IP Multicasting.

I wonder how crippled the P2P characteristics will become before
the neo-utopian understanding of peer production finally gives 
way to a more critical perspective that recognizes that peer
to peer systems are being actively dismantled under our noses, 
and that client-server replacements are not to be seen as 
progress.



-- 
Dmytri Kleiner
editing text files since 1981

http://www.telekommunisten.net


_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de



Thread: oxenT04409 Message: 6/19 L4 [In index]
Message 04414 [Homepage] [Navigation]