Message 04613 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04596 Message: 14/93 L9 [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] reprap, exploitation, free goods etc

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius> wrote:

On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose>
[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]

Of course you know that I don't think you should be silent.

But, it seems that you think that myself, and others should be doing
something different than we are doing now.

I didn't say anyone should change what they are doing.  I'm only
trying to figure out how we can work together on the physical (not
just design) level to make such a change.  I'm trying to architect it,
but need the input of others.

Well, maybe I misunderstood what you were implying when you wrote on Open
Business Models Wiki Hive asking me (and I paraphrase) why I was not already
thinking about user-owner models. I am trying to explain to you why I was
not already thinking about them.

So, you've told us what you think we should be doing differently. I've
responded that I think there are some reasons why what you suggest will
work in real-world conditions, with the people, cultures, worldviews that
am working with.

ok.  I can see that is your opinion.

So, that is my response to your original question of "why are you
on this, when you could be focusing on user-owner instead?"

I wish you wouldn't put quotes around a sentence I never wrote and
didn't mean to imply.  I'm only here seeking help so that WE can work
toward physical freedom.  I might be able to eventually do it on my
own, but we are running out of time, so just wanted to see if anyone
else could help me debug it.

You're right, sorry for misrepresenting you, when I was parphrasing what I
thought you were saying. I should have said that I was paraphrasing you.

How do we work towards physical freedom in existing capitalist systems?

The response again is because I do not think that the people, and their
existing worldviews and culture will resonate with, adopt, or employ what
you suggest.

Yes, I see that is what you think.  I wonder what others think.

What kind of responses are you receiving?

I do think that people like myself, "early adopters", will be willing to
experiment with the idea, to try it out. That is something that I have
offered in the past.

Yes, but I thought someone besides you might be willing, and was
looking for that help.

Ok. Fair enough. I offered, because I believe that it is plausible that this
could work now for some people in some places. That this could become a
choice for people that is known to work. But, I never really understood how
you wanted to explore making it work in the real world, under existing legal
systems, etc

But, I know that pretty much the only way to make people change in ways
are not ready to, by your own schedule, is at gunpoint, "revolution"
And then, as in the past when this method is employed, you haven't really
changed those people, you have actually caused them to regress into
fear-based ways of solving problems. Not that I think that this is what
want to do. But, it is the only way that works to make social change
when people are not yet ready for it, which *is* what you are asking for.

How can I really be sure nobody is ready for it unless I ask everyone?
 There is a chance that you are wrong, so I must try since I am a
terrible farmer and food prices are causing major trouble in the
world, and those trouble are about to come to the US where I live.  I
am almost frantic because of this.  Won't you let others join me if
they wish?

If you think I am stopping people from joining you, please don't think that.
I have no control over the choices of others.

Please continue to ask. Maybe I am insane, but sometimes your asking has
come across as a kind of blanket dismissal of anyone that is not doing what
you suggest. So, that is where I am coming from. I am supplying a
counter-point to why people might *not* be doing what you are talking about
right now.

Otherwise, you're at the mercy of other people being ready, willing, and
able to accept your solutions to problems of existence. There is no way
speed it up, save creating the conditions that help people be ready for

Actually, I take that back, I think there is one way to speed up "user
owner", and that is for *you* to create a real-world working example that
shows people how it's done, instead of telling people they should adopt
model that no-one can yet find any concrete proof upon which to base
assumptions about it. Lead us by example. That is what the open source
software developers that you are talking about did. They *built*
and shared it under paradigms of their creation, and thus proved that
system was sustainable.

Maybe I'll just have to do it all by myself and report back here after
I've debugged the design and successfully implemented a fully working
instance.  Hopefully I won't be kicked out of my house and starve
before then.

If your basic subsistence-level existence hinges on the wide-spread adoption
of user-owner by everyone who reads this, or even most of them, then yes,
you may indeed be in terrible trouble.

Please feel free to ignore me and what I am saying. I *like* your ideas,
your theories. I just am trying to share with you what I know about human
nature. I am trying to help you de-bug and improve your approach with

Contact: projekt

Sam Rose
Social Synergy
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
AIM: Str9960
Linkedin Profile:
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose

Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
Information Filtering:

[2 text/html]
Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT04596 Message: 14/93 L9 [In index]
Message 04613 [Homepage] [Navigation]