April 2011 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

American Behavioral Scientist Special Issue on Prosumption and Social Media
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/prosumer/ABS_CFP.html this should be published by now, can someone find out more? thanks for helping, Michel -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

participatory genomics
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

hi alessandro, could you look into this, for a wiki entry, and eventually, a blog entry? see http://recursivepublic.net/2011/01/participatory-genomics/ -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

a convincing left critique of Chavez and Venezuela
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

http://platypus1917.org/2010/07/09/the-dead-left-chavez-and-the-bolivarian-… -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

man and nature, four part essay
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

http://rosswolfe.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/man-and-nature-parts-i-iv-complet… Taken from a four-part essay by Ross Wolfe: "At some points, nature was viewed as an adversary to be feared, bringing plague, catastrophe, and famine to ravage mankind. Often these elemental forces were either animistically, naturalistically, or totemistically embodied as divine powers in themselves,[1] or anthropomorphized as gods who commanded these forces as they saw fit. When cataclysms occurred, it was because the gods or spirits had somehow been enraged by the misdeeds of men, and thus they unleashed their fury upon the mass of fear-stricken mortals. In Christian times, this same logic persisted,[2] with periods of plenty seen as signs of God’s providence and grace, while periods of blight were viewed as God’s wrath, brought on by the sinfulness and iniquity of men. Later, at the dawn of the Enlightenment, nature was reenvisioned as dead matter, abiding by a set of mechanical but unknown laws, which could be discovered and mastered through careful study and observation under controlled conditions. As the Baconian dictum went, contra Aristotle: “the secrets of nature reveal themselves better through harassments applied by the arts [torture] than when they go on in their own way.”[3] Thus began the “conquest” of nature, the quest to harness its forces so that they may serve the ends of mankind. Robbed of their mysterious properties, natural objects therefore became “disenchanted,” in the Weberian sense.[4] With the arrival of the Enlightenment, as Hegel recognized, “the intellect will cognize what is intuited as a mere thing, reducing the sacred grove to mere timber.”[5] Romanticism responded to this alienation from nature with a sense of tragic loss, and sought to regain what they saw as the fractured unity of man and nature. The Romantics exalted the primitive, celebrating the charming naïveté of the ancient Greeks or their modern-day counterparts, who appeared in the form of “noble savages.” The playwright Friedrich Schiller even dedicated an essay to the distinction between the “naïve”[6] and “sentimental” in poetry. For modern man, he asserted, “nature has disappeared from our humanity, and we can reencounter it in its genuineness only outside of humanity in the inanimate world. Not our greater naturalness [Naturmäßigkeit], but the very opposite, the unnaturalness [Naturwidrigkeit] of our relationships, conditions, and mores forces us to fashion a satisfaction in the physical world that is not to be hoped for in the moral world.”[7] The Romantics thus preferred the bucolic simplicity of the small old village to the sprawling chaos of the modern city. Vitalistic explanations of nature, like Goethe’s and Schelling’s, were offered as alternatives to the Democritean-Newtonian vision of the universe as composed of dead matter and obeying a changeless set of mechanical laws. Despite its nostalgia for a bygone simplicity of life and man’s unity with nature, the Romantic worldview was gradually overtaken by that belonging to the modern industrialist. To the industrialist, nature presented itself as a wealth of raw materials waiting to be exploited. Through the application of human labor, these natural resources could be transformed into social products, valuable commodities to be distributed to the whole of society. “Man when producing wealth acts upon the things which Nature supplies,” wrote Alfred Marshall, the famous British economist. “The gifts of Nature to man are firstly materials such as iron, stone, wood, etc., and secondly, forces such as the power of the wind, and the heat of the sun, the source whence all other powers are derived.” Wealth, Marshall claimed, could only be generated through the action of men on these natural materials, whose worthiness could only be evaluated according to their potential utility. He continued: The agents of production are then Nature’s forces, and Man’s force; man’s force being generally most efficient when it is so applied as to control and direct nature’s forces, rather than to counteract them. And the wealth of a country depends upon the manner in which nature’s forces and man’s force work together in the production of wealth.[8] One might note how much the modern industrialist’s perspective on nature mirrors that of the Enlightenment man of science. For both, nature is conceived as nothing more than the sum of dead matter and the mechanical forces that compel it. The difference is that, while a Bacon or Descartes might be interested in natural products insofar as they might understand them, a Rockefeller or a Carnegie would be more interested in the way they might be exploited so as to generate value. Though Romanticism took a “dark” and urbanistic turn toward the middle of the century (think Baudelaire and the Symbolists) all the way up to the fin-de-siècle, many of the sentiments it originally possessed toward nature survived alongside Europe’s rapid industrialization and urbanization in the nineteenth century. The American Transcendentalists are only one of the more notable movements confirming this fact. In the twentieth century, however, the various currents stemming from early nineteenth-century Romanticism began to reemerge, tying themselves to a number of different political tendencies. Preservationists, environmentalists, vegetarians, and nudists joined in with groups from all shades of the political spectrum: Teddy Roosevelt-style big-game conservationism in America, NSDAP fascism in Germany, the pseudo-left Front Populaire in interwar France. Following the end of the war, these tendencies joined in with sections of the international New Left and later the nebulous “post-ideological” Left in the second half of the century. For most of these groups, the environmentalists tended to view any exploitation of nature by man as invasive, as a transgression of its inherent sanctity. Nature for them became something of a Kantian Ding-an-Sich, something inviolable and essentially unknowable. Its continued “natural” existence, uncorrupted by the malign influence of society, came to be considered a kind of virtue in itself. Untouched wilderness was thought to constitute some sort of pristine, prelapsarian paradise existing in perfect harmony with itself. It was thus to be set apart from any considerations of its utility to society. Faced with the reality of the increased industrial exploitation of natural sites, however, environmental activists blamed the rapid destruction of the environment on the expansion of global capitalism and corporate greed run amok. And so they marched in protest of the further exploitation of the environment, spouting apocalyptic rhetoric and predicting ecological catastrophe. All of humanity is doomed, they say, should mankind not mend its ways. In some sense, this almost marks a return to the primitive belief that the sinfulness of humanity will be met with wrath, and it is almost ironic that the rising sea levels resulting from the melting of the ice caps should recapitulate the biblical Flood. Modern society for the environmentalists constitutes a sort of capitalist Sodom and Gomorrah, which will soon be punished by Mother Nature. This is the sort of environmentalism one often encounters today, the dispensationalist hysteria almost eclipsing the sound scientific evidence on which the theory of global warming is based. These are the times in which we live. Returning to the original purpose of this outline, however, what should all these various historical conceptions of nature tell us? First of all, it should tell us that the conception of nature is in large part dependent on the society for which it is an object of contemplation. Nature, though it probably does operate according to an unchanging set of uniform physical laws, has a significance beyond its mere existence in itself. The concept of “nature” also carries with it a great deal of ideological baggage, and reflects the superstructures of thought in any given age. The problem, going forward, is thus not merely to find some sort of solution to the prospect of a potential ecological collapse, but to formulate nature as a social problem. The question of humanity’s relationship to nature goes far beyond “saving the planet” or any such platitude; it involves at its core the disalienation of man from nature, and their reconciliation thereby. No amount of recycling, collecting of litter, or “going Green” will solve this fundamental issue. The resolution of the problem of man and nature can only be reached through radical social transformation, and not by the aggregate sum of superficial actions that only treat mere symptoms rather than the underlying problem." -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

permaclture, and the alchemy of change
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

find this conversation of great interest: http://rosswolfe.wordpress.com/2011/04/01/an-interview-with-the-permacultur… Nicholas, if you have time, any comments to introduce this dialogue on our blog would be well appreciated, Michel -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

a debate on country-city (dis)urbanism, moscow 1930
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

Should be interesting for the p2p urbanist group: http://rosswolfe.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/mikhail-okhitovich-moisei-ginzbur… Le Corbusier, dismayed at Ginzburg’s sudden new position, wrote to his friend pleading for his return to Urbanism: *Moscow, March 17, 1930* *My dear [Moisei] Ginzburg,* *I am leaving Moscow this evening. I have been asked to write a report on the recent competition for the Green Town of Moscow. I haven’t done so, not wanting to present a judgment on the work of colleagues. On the other hand, I answered the request that was made to me indirectly, by giving the Committee for a Green Town ‘some commentaries on the development of Moscow and the Green Town.’ My conclusions cannot agree with the enthusiasm that the simple word ‘deurbanization’ seems to raise at the moment.* *There is a contradiction in the term itself; this word is a fundamental misunderstanding that has deceived many Western theoreticians and wasted a lot of the time of governing boards of industries — a fundamental misunderstanding that everything opposes and refutes. Society is complex; it is not simple. Whoever tries to bring hurried and tendentious solutions to its problems will [265] meet opposition: it revenges itself, it falls into a state of crisis, and despite changes and regulations, it doesn’t let itself be manipulated: it is life that decides!* *Last evening, in the Kremlin, in the office of Mr. Lejawa, the vice-president of the USSR, Mr. Miliutin, one of the commissars of the people, had a thought of Lenin translated for me that, far from supporting the thesis of deurbanization, on the contrary confirms the necessity of urban reform. Lenin said this: ‘If one wants to save the peasant, one must take industry to the country. Lenin did not say ‘If one wants to save the town-dweller’; one mustn’t confound, there is all the difference! To take industry to the country, that is to say industrialize the country, that is to create places of human concentration with machines at their disposal. The machine will make the muzhik think. Nature is good for the city-dweller whose mind has been galvanized by the city, who puts to work, in the city, the diligent mechanism of his mind. It is in the group, in shock and cooperation, struggle and mutual help, in activity, that the mind ripens and brings forth fruits. One should like to think so, but reality is there; it is not the peasant who looks at the trees in bloom and listens to the song of the lark. It is the town-dweller who does that. You understand what I mean, if, frankly, we are not fooling ourselves with words.* *Men feel the need to get together — always, in all countries and climates. The group brings them security and defense, the pleasure of company. But as soon as climates become difficult, grouping encourages industrial activity, production by means of which men live (are dressed, make themselves comfortable). And intellectual production is the daughter of united men. Intelligence develops, is sharpened, multiplies its play, acquires its subtlety and innumerable aspects, in the mass of groups. It is the very fruit of concentration. Dispersion frightens, makes poorer, and loosens all the ties of physical and spiritual discipline, lacking which men return to their primitive state.* *International statistics show us that death rates are lowest in the densest agglomerations; they diminish as populations concentrate. These are statistical facts; they must be accepted.* *History shows the great movements of human thought at the mathematical points of greatest concentration. Under Pericles, Athens was closely peopled like one of our modern cities, and that is why Socrates and Plato were able to discuss pure ideas there.* *Consider more exactly that ten centuries of premachine civilization have made these cities for us which at the moment of mechanical expansion are a frightful and dangerous grimace. Admit then that the evil is there, in that heritage, and that its salvation is here: to adapt the cities, which will continue to concentrate themselves more and more (statistics and concomitant elements [266] of modern progress: transports: intellectual attractions, industrial organization); to adapt our cities to contemporary. needs, that is to say to rebuild them (as, besides, from their birth they have continually rebuilt themselves).* *My dear Ginzburg, modern architecture has precisely the magnificent mission of organizing the life of collectivities. I was the first to proclaim that the modern cay should be an immense park, a green city. But to allow this seeming luxury, I increased the density by four and — instead of extending them — shortened distances.* *I can nevertheless imagine very well, as a satellite to any urban agglomeration for working and living, a Green Town for resting, eventually organized as with you by turns every fifth day.* *I even pointed out in my comments that the compulsory attendance for rest, at least once in three periods, every fifteen days, could be applied like time-clocking for work: and would include the practice of an adequate sport by individual prescription of the doctors of the Green Town. The Green Town becomes the garage where the car is checked (oil, lubrication, verification of organs, revision, maintenance of the car). Besides, the intimacy with nature (radiant springs, winter tempests) incites to meditation, to introspection.* *Please then do not see a hostile attitude in my serene and firm affirmation: ‘Mankind tends to urbanize.’* *Appreciate this characteristic detail yourself — one of the projects of deurbanization proposes, among other things, to build straw huts in the forest of the Green Town. Bravo, magnificent! as long as they are only for weekends! But do not say that having built huts in straw, you can then tear down Moscow.* *Very cordially yours,* *L.C.* * *Ginzburg responded thus: *My dear Le Corbusier,* *Our recent conversation about city planning and your letter have compelled me to rethink the entire problem, to recall your objections, the objections you made when you visited me and which you now write about in your letter.* *Like all my friends, I value you tremendously not only as a subtle master architect but also as a man with the ability to solve radically and fundamentally the important problems of organization.* *For me you are today the greatest and most brilliant representative of the profession that gives my life content, goal, and meaning.* *That is why your ideas and solutions in the area of city planning have for us a quite exceptional interest and importance.* *You have often told me that you adore nature and would like to live always among greenery…You write that you were the first to advocate the luxury of an enormous park in the city…During our stroll on Tverskaia Street [the present Gorkii Street] you told me that Perret and all the best of the French architects had tried to take housing out of the city. In other words, you yourself pose the problem of giving man ideal physical surroundings, a problem for which we are trying, in our projects, to find a radical solution. But you feel obliged to consider such a radical solution possible. In other words, in spite of your brilliant gifts, you find yourself powerless to overcome the objective contradictions of modern capitalism.* *A careful study of your work shows that it is in fact a consistent and stubborn attempt to round off the sharper corners of city planning and smooth and soften all its rough edges.* *You are the finest of the surgeons of the modern city, you want to cure it of its ills whatever the cost. Therefore you raise the entire city on stilts, hoping to solve the insoluble urban traffic problem. You create wonderful gardens on the roofs of tall buildings, hoping to give people an extra patch of green, you design homes whose occupants enjoy perfect convenience, peace, and comfort. But you do all this because you want to cure the city, because you are trying to keep it essentially the same as capitalism made it.* *We in the USSR are in a more favorable position — we are not tied by the past.* *History confronts us with problems that can only have a revolutionary solution [paraphrasing Marx] and, however feeble our resources, we will solve them no matter what.* *We are making a diagnosis of the modern city. We say: yes, it is sick, mortally sick. But we do not want to cure it. We prefer to destroy it and intend to begin work on a new form of human settlement that will be free of internal contradictions and might be called socialist. We know that raising a city on stilts (and you have seen that in this respect we are following your example) does not permit a radical solution of the urban traffic problem. Driving between columns is almost the same as driving through narrow streets.* *We know that the roof garden is an excellent architectural solution, but it cannot solve the sanitation problem, the problem of open spaces. And similarly, we would like to find a solution for the living unit, but not in the form of a luxurious private home or a European-type hotel.* *You yourself talk of international statistics which show that the birth rate is the highest and the death rate the lowest in the most densely populated areas. But this is only natural. The thinly populated centers are poor villages and without doctors or culture, without means and without decent food. You write that culture develops only where people are concentrated in large masses. But this is perfectly understandable. It describes the situation in a capitalist society, though not elsewhere. We in the Soviet Union must make culture available to the entire population, not merely the urban population, whatever the cost. But to do so we cannot transfer 100 million of our peasants to the big cities, not without destroying our agriculture. Accordingly, we want all the beneficial consequences of concentration for the development of culture and, at the same time, all the advantages of dispersal and decentralization for spreading culture as uniformly as possible over the population. And for this it is necessary to create new socialist forms of population settlement based on elimination of all the disparities between town and country.* *You are absolutely right in your high evaluation of the collective in human history. But our disagreement is not along those lines. The higher requirements of collectivism and industrial concentration demand decentralization and dispersal in space; that is the crux of the matter.* *I note with pleasure that you consider it necessary to quote Lenin. You say that he thought of saving the peasant by introducing industry into the village, but did not think at all of saving the city dweller.* *But you are wrong, my dear Le Corbusier. Not only about Lenin but Engels and Marx thought long and often about both. Or rather for them these were two aspects of the same problem.* *Permit me to quote their own words on the subject:* *A resettlement of mankind is necessary, with the elimination of rural neglect and isolation and the unnatural crowding of huge masses into the big cities.* *– Lenin* *The separation of town and country has condemned the rural population to millennia of backwardness and the urban population to being mere wage slaves, it has destroyed the basis for the spiritual development of the former and the physical development of the latter.* *– Engels* *The contradiction between town and country is the coarsest expression of the subjection of the personality to the division of labor, which transforms the individual into a limited urban animal, on the one hand, and a limited rural animal, on the other.* *– Marx* *You refer to Perret’s unsuccessful attempts to take housing out of the city. But this too is quite understandable. He severed an isolated member from a complex organism. That member inevitably wasted away. We are removing from the city nothing less than the city itself, its entire system of supply and culture. In other words, we are creating a whole new organism. This is quite different from what Perret was trying to do.* *You write that the peasant does not love flowers and does not hear the song of the skylark. But of course he doesn’t…when he is exhausted with backbreaking labor. But we want our peasant to listen to the skylark. And we know that for this it is only necessary to lighten his labor and bring more culture into his life. And all this will be possible not by smoothing out the contradictions with which the modern capitalist system is riddled, but by creating new forms of human settlement more worthy of the future.* *We are aware that we have yet to find the solution to this very difficult problem. But we cannot refrain from posing it, we cannot refrain from trying to solve it. That is our duty, the duty of architects who would like to become the architects of socialism.* *Moreover, we hope that in the future, as in the past, we shall be able to learn a great deal from you, and that what we learn will help us to solve our new and difficult problems.* *Cordial greetings from myself and my friends,* *Yours sincerely,* *M. Ginzburg* *From Sovremennaia Arkhitektura, 1930.* -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] You're invited to "SHARE San Francisco"
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

Thank you Mira, as I live in Thailand, I'll share with my network instead, Michel On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Mira Luna <mira(a)sfbace.org> wrote: > SHARE San Francisco is convening local leaders of the new > sharing economy for a day of connection, conversation, and action to > strengthen the Bay Area as a platform for sharing Saturday, May 7th: • What > is the new sharing economy and why is it important to you? • What > initiatives are increasing citizen access to resources in San Francisco? • > What are the opportunities for you in the new sharing economy? • What new > collaborations can strengthen San Francisco as a platform for sharing? >  You'll explore these questions with entrepreneurs, students, thought > leaders, community organizers, government officials, academics, cultural > influencers, urban designers, and professionals from a cross section of the > sharing economy. And you're invited to bring a related topic to discuss > during the unconference. For more information and to register, visit > http://www.shareable.net/share-san-francisco Use the code Access to attend > for $50! For more info and volunteering contact milicent(a)shareable.net SHARE > San Francisco <http://share-eivtefrnd.eventbrite.com> > Saturday, May 07, 2011 at 8:30 AM (PT) The Hub SoMa 901 Mission > Street > San Francisco CA View Map<http://maps.google.com/maps?q=901+Mission+Street+San+Francisco+CA&hl=en> > Attend <http://share-eivtefrnd.eventbrite.com> > <http://share.eventbrite.com?utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campai…> > Want company? Share this event! > [image: Facebook] > <http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fshare-esfb.eventbrite.com…> [image: > Twitter] > <http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fshare-estw.eventbrite.com&text=Ch…> [image: > LinkedIn] > <http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=http%3A%2F%2Fshare-esli.eventbrite…> [image: > Eventbrite] <http://www.eventbrite.com/r/eivtefrnd> > -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

complexity issues
by Michel Bauwens 08 Apr '11

08 Apr '11

http://www.blog.ottoscharmer.com/?p=306 Hi Paul, if you have time, it would be nice to introduce and comment on otto scharmer's view above, Michel -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

need-based allocation of labour
by Michel Bauwens 07 Apr '11

07 Apr '11

Hi Kevin, I wonder if you are familiar with the s-f book Red Star, mentioned in the update here, http://p2pfoundation.net/Hint-based_Systems(see fictional example), this should be of interest to christian siefkes as well, Michel -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

3 3

Fwd: DYNDY on bitcoins
by Michel Bauwens 07 Apr '11

07 Apr '11

hi Rob, I'm interested in your anecdote about the fed being interested in alternative currencies? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jaromil <jaromil(a)dyne.org> Date: Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:00 PM Subject: DYNDY on bitcoins To: p2presearch(a)listcultures.org Cc: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com, george(a)community-intelligence.com, thg(a)mindspring.com, hankaiwen(a)gmail.com, david(a)bollier.org dear colleagues, fellow researchers, p2p enthusiasts yesterday I've had a funny experience for the first time seeing the biggest amount of suits ever gathered in the same room :) while accompanying my friend Genjix, a bitcoin developer invited to talk about this digital born monetary system. this is the article that came out of it, trying to shed some light on interesting aspects I've caught so far, feel free to spread around it to anyone interested http://www.dyndy.net/2011/04/bitcoin-presented-to-the-old-world/ the attempt is to round up on some reflections matured around the concept of crypto-currency and might serve as a balanced account on the implications that such a "disruptive technology" has for societies, especially in dense settlements, a theme i'm planning to further develop in future, with your kind support :) bests -- jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org GPG: B2D9 9376 BFB2 60B7 601F 5B62 F6D3 FBD9 C2B6 8E39 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQQcBAEBCAAGBQJNnZlYAAoJEAslGzkIl3JRAGAf/R6qw0ivPzPuvsmFEy6yomMi 7+3p5SJ4dLG8mZNdPzFShraLIJZQ8RCKbtybu2REadGtjt2BRIAlYosyVwI0hjBC 9WbC5p3wA+mn3MK4/k/MS+6OrCIo+bQdGFqM4ZQdghZnjqVivAJhmgXoIuTMdUEP /xw3Slzcat20Z2Gc8gJsYXxW2JVUG64Ei4gLW6ETbLgmSVOiobaU6VPjulGu4bfq zYzyISzxkFMVf9qUw8PGZXnigoQljoNqwNGkmS/MsPHcIWK1GPiepLnlhR+XE0S4 TD5O0aHsOvpAtaNz0V3sieY3CAjS59OYHR0DxLK59qLlKNMZ73B741zu6wZCL/Xe OPTVaWfMrxo8GK8WVmXSFMjuwLuDjMXzn8yKMHe3l/XPKs3vP5yRJc0iE7kx57tU 0Q5isDMA5QX9+tmSVAkxj4Ie9/PspBtBVD/tciCngZ1zkJ+lZQFRNDkdnhdUwvIu tCXyT4la01l0+5bMurQTiXFxIwwvsoH/K2hqeYo1cnmZw/ua7eFwvzrNfMN+RBN0 Hh1xEYB2QlVkY9+/FU2QoKpSPZ4RoRnA8r8AyJFDHLBgHGnyA1llVI51DYYj6W3v YtyZXVCFdCkXg7ghFqK0QTta8yVB9tmV59wcrPqJ+d8AtP32eB/tIb9CKkPLlJTL couPqpN3FiygxPtsjjFm2oH4d3xmZn0bwSKfwK6/wRaN4MM4xYkS/Ec9YvEM8E7r tAkkKuhDifrnbtCn47AcEci8oGAPCJca97raueCw1pO0P8tFb93RAL4UsGhNByuD DEAx6Aqycf0KL53bIJ5Fi0tPp97UwnbAY+JgFQCdnTfnMcdLnOEu1HWwPP/Ac32/ +W7gonLlU1G0oAfQb7gDTlYzyT2lKfODO7PY4vehdvt4Uzfi4XASC3dvbJCl27oY S9VMnuzezKHt8jmFwV9DJcOOB26B0wR+Fg793YjyjUzEBHSComeiXDzTgLj6rv4K DMDzFqwaXt9e196mx+R9rDkQA+iXk3BpszpzmKU5pRZcFCG/E53wxuDn38Naw64u tlHEFdgE13zFq7yMbZKrkWbl6QVTkQ5gOBq7013jo5H2KUcAEPF1h3Y9mt52k5WL OVqj50H5Lg/fWQpgcLRLe+1o6ImXrsEBbq3mOZ0V+Pg/Mb8lQLEaWtw7T/BiWIVQ vfpXOmz4sh8G7CuhaRyih7DzD86DiT2HMLrSFgBCji8wHLqypwB79FDbW30lEFrb g4NHd3TTU6mds/nxGnNPMHWci+2iZ7AB3SKNl1v/jqYdlZliZUduyskLmLZiRW8J P8mE/8641Jah0NNdBvaGwgT/AAnhdgTR7c3TS5W0ZqdBnTXUzSh2abkRYML5NBs= =MUu9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0