March 2014 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: [Commoning] "...eventually the Commoners collapse completely, followed by the Elites."
by Michel Bauwens 18 Mar '14

18 Mar '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: mp <mp(a)aktivix.org> Date: Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:01 PM Subject: [Commoning] "...eventually the Commoners collapse completely, followed by the Elites." To: Commoning List <commoning(a)lists.wissensallmende.de> And Now for Something Completely Different: NASA-funded study: industrial civilisation headed for 'irreversible collapse'? Natural and social scientists develop new model of how 'perfect storm' of crises could unravel global system http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/14/nasa-civil… Excerpt: Modelling a range of different scenarios, Motesharri and his colleagues conclude that under conditions "closely reflecting the reality of the world today... we find that collapse is difficult to avoid." In the first of these scenarios, civilisation: ".... appears to be on a sustainable path for quite a long time, but even using an optimal depletion rate and starting with a very small number of Elites, the Elites eventually consume too much, resulting in a famine among Commoners that eventually causes the collapse of society. It is important to note that this Type-L collapse is due to an inequality-induced famine that causes a loss of workers, rather than a collapse of Nature." Another scenario focuses on the role of continued resource exploitation, finding that "with a larger depletion rate, the decline of the Commoners occurs faster, while the Elites are still thriving, but eventually the Commoners collapse completely, followed by the Elites." _______________________________________________ Commoning mailing list Commoning(a)lists.wissensallmende.de http://lists.wissensallmende.de/mailman/listinfo/commoning -- *Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..* P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

News Challenge Submission - Build a Global Platform for Transition to an Open Knowledge Society
by Kevin Flanagan 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

Show your support for the submission to the Knight News Challenge to build on the experience of the floksociety.org project and create a global platform for transition to an open knowledge society. You can help by spreading the word or show a little love by applauding the project and others on www.newschallenge.org/challenge/2014/submissions/a-global-platform-for-rese… ------------------------------ ---------------------------------------- In ONE sentence, tell us about your project to strengthen the Internet for free expression and innovation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- We're working to create a permanent, expandable platform for open technology-focused policy making, as free technical infrastructures can only exist in the favourable context of a more open society. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Who will benefit from what you propose? What have you observed that makes you think that? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The project has the potential to empower and transform local policy and decision-making processes through our open knowledge platform. Following the global responses we have received, we believe that the time is right for an expanded effort rooted in various locations, in order to refine locally-adapted policy models, validated by local input and experience. A truly open Internet doesn't only depend on the interconnection of bottom-up open technologies, but also requires policy frameworks that are favourable to their adoption and maintenance. Cities, regions, nation-states and supra-national entities will be able to benefit from collaborative open policy-making, learning from each other's experiences. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- What progress have you made so far? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- FLOKS' collaborative efforts have already produced 10 draft policy proposals toward an integrated transition program, the first effort of its kind. Our documents on Human Capabilities, Commons Oriented Productive Capacities, Social Infrastructure and Institutional Innovation, Open Technical Infrastructures, and Commons Infrastructure for Collective Life may be viewed (under the heading of Research - Streams) on the FLOKSociety wiki (en.wiki.floksociety.org) These proposals will be presented and discussed at a global-local summit in Quito at the end of May 2014. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Show your support for a global platform for transition to an open knowledge society on www.newschallenge.org/challenge/2014/submissions/a-global-platform-for-rese… Our friends from the P2P Lab in Greece have also made a submission - The P2P Urbanism Platform: From the Social to the Urban Web https://www.newschallenge.org/challenge/2014/submissions/the-p2p-urbanism-p… source - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/knight-news-challenge-submission-a-global-pla…

2 1

Re: [P2P-F] [Networkedlabour] Socialist Licences
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

I published the critique on my blog as well, and promised to answer, so here is a first attempt see inline On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 6:52 PM, peter waterman <peterwaterman1936(a)gmail.com > wrote: > Peter says: > > I can more or less understand what is at issue here, but as 'thru a glass, > darkly'. In other words, I am out my depth here. But I certainly welcome > informed and civil dialogue on a matter rather more central to global > social emancipation than the regurgitation of sterile debates that mark the > theologically-inclined Left. > > May the exchange continue, civilly and fruitfully. > > PeterW > > > keimform.de > Auf der Suche nach dem Neuen im Alten > [image: Artikel drucken]<http://keimform.de/2014/socialist-licenses/print/> > Socialist Licenses? > > *Von* Stefan Meretz > > [Diesen Text gibt es auch auf deutsch<http://keimform.de/2014/sozialistische-lizenzen/> > ] > > Michel Bauwens has made a proposal for a "median choice of socialist > licenses"<http://keimform.de/2014/wie-erreichen-wir-eine-commons-orientierte-transfor…>which is based on the > Copyfarleft-License <http://keimform.de/2008/copyfarleft-a-critique/> of > Dymtri Kleiner. In this post I try to critically analyze his proposal. > > At the beginning Bauwens' thesis is: "the more communistic the sharing > license we use, the more capitalistic the practice". Being a prominent > example the GNU GPL<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License>is called a "communist license". Is there something in that? > > At first one has to understand the nature licenses have under the given > conditions. Licenses are permissions, thus contracts, "granted by a party > ('licensor') to another party ('licensee') as an element of an agreement > between those parties". It bases on the precondition of excluding all other > people by the "rightholder". The power of exclusion given by law can be > converted into a "permission for all" by way of tricky constructions > combined with the obligation to put derived works under the GPL as well ( > copyleft <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft> principle). > > Herein is nothing communist. The logic of exclusion is partially reversed > and therefore new spaces of commons oriented practices can be created. > Better than nothing. The license itself only protects these practices > against proprietary destructions. From my point of view this can not be > more under the given conditions. The outer world is ruled by the logics of > valuation and exclusion, and every free zone to self-determine other > practices has to be wrested from these dominant logics. Embryonic forms, > precisely. > This first critique is rather weak. Indeed, I am not talking about the legal, contractual basis of the GPL and similar licenses, but on the social logic that they enable, which is: it allows anybody to contribute, and it allows anybody to use. This is both consistent with Marx's defintion of communism, and with the definition I use, that of communal shareholding by Alan Page Fiske. This logic of course only exists in the realm of abundant digital information, and exists within the political economy of capital. > The second part of the thesis "...the more capitalistic the practice" fails > as well. There is no comparative of "capitalistic". If you replace > "capitalistic" with "commodity-based", then is becomes even clearer: > Something is a commodity or not. Free software, for instance, isn't a > commodity. It can be appropriated and used by everyone, even by big > corporations. However, they cannot transform the free software into a > commodity, since this is prevented by the GPL. But they can use the > software in order to realize their business models in another fields. This > free use is a thorn in Bauwens side. He wants the commons to only be > commercially used by those who have contributed beforehand. > This is also very weak, since I am not saying and never said, that the GPL turns free sofrware into a commodity. But what I'm saying, and what nobody can deny, is that non-commodified free software is subsumed to the capitalist economy that uses it. 75% of Linux developers are paid by commercial companies operating in the capitalist marketplace. > From my perspective the presentation of the GPL as "communist" is wrong, > but this attribution has the function to propagate a milder license variant > which then is called "socialist": the PPL (Peer-Production-License)<http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License>. > This license only grants external access to the resources to those who are > using them non-commercially, while internally unlimited exploitation is > allowed. The divide intern/extern usually refers to a firm. If external > parties want to use the resources commercially, then they have to pay a > license fee or make other contributions. > The GPL effectively enables a social logic of unlimited use, including by multinational companies. The peer production license resticts it. Let me point out that I do not take the PPL as perfect, but as a new kind of Commons-Based Reciprocity Licenses. Such licenses fully allow commercial exploitation, but ask for reciprocity. Think of a traditional indigenous community using a GPL of similar. This means any commercial entity can use the knowledge and commercialize it, without any benefit or profit-sharing with the creators of the knowledge. A CBRL would simply ask for reciprocity > *Is only exchange reciprocal?* > > In order to justify the PPL the argument of reciprocity is claimed. The > "communist" GPL is non-reciprocal, while the "socialist" PPL demands > reciprocity. The word reciprocity nicely blurs what is actually meant: > *exchange*. In fact, the GPL breaks the logic of exchange, while the PPL > requires and enforces it -- namely not only the exchange logic itself, but > the societally valid form of *equivalent exchange*. Someone who wants to > keep "the surplus value into the commons sphere" has to act that way, > whereby "commons sphere" is a euphemism for an ordinary company. > This is the first valid critique. Indeed, the PPL / CBRL would indeed limit the non-reciprocity for for-profit entities, but no, Stefan is wrong, it does not demand equivalent exchange, but some form of negotiated reciprocity. The important aspect is to generate a flow of realized value, necessary for social reproduction, from the sphere of capital accumulation to the sphere of the commons. > The notion of reciprocity is misused in an ideologically blurring way. > Licenses are never reciprocal, only people can behave that way. Thus, the > question can only be whether licenses encourage reciprocity between people > or not, and if so, in what way. Then the evaluation of GPL and PPL looks > completely different. > > The GPL creates and promotes *direct* reciprocity between people, because > no exchange and also no compelled contribution stands between people. > This is absolutely wrong, the GPL doesn't demand nor create direct reciprocity between people. It is entirelhy possible to use GPL material without any reciprocity, as the overwhelming majority of its users actually do. But the GPL requires what anthropologist call 'general reciprocity', i.e. at the collective level, a minimum of contributions is needed to sustain the system. But there is absolutely no requirement for direct reciprocity. The reciprocity is between the individual and the system as a whole. A coder or wikipedia contributor cannot expect any return from any particular individual. > By contrast, the PPL limits direct reciprocity by putting exchange or > compulsory contributions between people if they want to use resources > commercially. But what is commercial? It is the same discussion which has > taken place around the NC module of the Creative Commons<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons>Licenses. There the insight is: The NC module undermines sharing, and the > same applies to the PPL (although trying to dissociate from the CC-NC). > The PPL only limits non-recicprocal use by for-profit companies. It does not prohibit commercial exploitation but actually encourages it, while the Non-Commercial CC license actually prohibits it. The NC does not undermine sharing, but commercialisation. The PPL encourages and allows both sharing and commercialisation. > To sharpen the point: Both licenses support reciprocal behavior of people. > With respect to GPL it is *positive reciprocity*, because in this case it > only counts how people behave socially and which rules they agree upon in a > self-determined way, in order to *bring all participants together*. > Concerning the PPL it is *negative reciprocity*, since a portion of > people are subjugated to the alien form of exchange of equivalents (money) > and are *excluded* from the cooperation to this end. Thus, the GPL is > rather in accordance with the commons idea of self-determining own rules > than the PPL. > >From the above refutations follow that this conclusion is entirely erroneous. In fact, there is only self-determination of the contributory process in the GPL context, but full alienation to capital in the surrounding commercial sphere. By contrast the PPL not only allows full self-determination in the contributory sphere, but requires self-management in the cooperative sphere of self-reproduction, something which is much more difficult with the GPL. END OF THE FIRST RESPONSE Peter, if you resend this somehow, it will prompt me to respond to the second part.

2 2

"applauding" the Newschallenge proposal on open policies
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

Dear friends, thanks for "applauding" the application below, which would allow us to extend the FLOK transition work on a global scale, with funding, Thanks for mobilizing your networks for this, see: https://www.newschallenge.org/challenge/2014/submissions/a-global-platform-… Michel ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kevin Flanagan <kevin(a)p2pfoundation.net> Date: Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 10:52 PM Subject: [newschallenge] We have submitted our application To: newschallenge(a)lists.p2pfoundation.net Hello Everyone, We have submitted our application for the news challenge. https://www.newschallenge.org/challenge/2014/submissions/a-global-platform-… What do you think? Kevin -- *Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..* P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Fwd: [members] Fwd: Mobile ICT and New Media in Africa - international conference 26-27 May 2014 in Accra, Ghana
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <n.gilbert(a)surrey.ac.uk> Date: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 5:13 AM Subject: [members] Fwd: Mobile ICT and New Media in Africa - international conference 26-27 May 2014 in Accra, Ghana To: members(a)lists.p2pvalue.eu Cc: Loretta.Anania(a)ec.europa.eu Forwarded as requested. Nigel Begin forwarded message: *From: *"Loretta.Anania(a)ec.europa.eu" <Loretta.Anania(a)ec.europa.eu> *Subject: **Mobile ICT and New Media in Africa - international conference 26-27 May 2014 in Accra, Ghana* *Date: *17 March 2014 09:53:30 GMT *To: *"pierre-jean.benghozi(a)polytechnique.edu" < pierre-jean.benghozi(a)polytechnique.edu>, "francesco.nucci(a)eng.it" < francesco.nucci(a)eng.it>, "Francesca.Bria(a)nesta.org.uk" < Francesca.Bria(a)nesta.org.uk>, "ddato(a)tiscali.com" <ddato(a)tiscali.com>, " fiona.williams(a)ericsson.com" <fiona.williams(a)ericsson.com>, " Coby.van.Vonderen(a)cwi.nl" <Coby.van.Vonderen(a)cwi.nl>, "pdesousa(a)ieee.org" < pdesousa(a)ieee.org>, "cinthia.campi(a)tiscali.it" <cinthia.campi(a)tiscali.it>, "Gilbert GN Prof (Sociology)" <n.gilbert(a)surrey.ac.uk>, " marc.bourreau(a)telecom-paristech.fr" <marc.bourreau(a)telecom-paristech.fr>, " W.A.G.A.Bouwman(a)tudelft.nl" <W.A.G.A.Bouwman(a)tudelft.nl>, " Jan.Krancke(a)telekom.de" <Jan.Krancke(a)telekom.de>, "p.s.cesar(a)cwi.nl" < p.s.cesar(a)cwi.nl>, "ayse.goker.1(a)soi.city.ac.uk" < ayse.goker.1(a)soi.city.ac.uk> A serious telecom research event, the first ITS event that is taking place in Africa (with the exclusion of South Africa, few venture elsewhere) Can you please inform experts, faculty, PhD students and others who might contribute to the event?Thank you Loretta *From:* Its-l [mailto:[email protected]<its-l-bounces(a)listserv-itsworld.org> ] *On Behalf Of *Morten Falch *Sent:* Saturday, March 15, 2014 5:53 PM *To:* ITS-L(a)listserv-itsworld.org *Subject:* [Its-l] 2nd Call for Papers: The Future of Mobile ICT and New Media in Africa - 3rd CMI GTUC international conference 26-27 May 2014 in Accra, Ghana INVITATION: ================= Please consider to contribute to and/or forward to the appropriate groups the following opportunity to submit and publish original scientific results on Mobile ICT and New Media in Africa. Selected papers will be published in a special edition of Nordic- and Baltic Journal of ICT*.* ================= Mobile and fixed communication networks and services have been advancing at a fast pace in Africa and is increasingly used as technology platforms for meeting challenges in other fields such as health, education, banking, etc. New media have also emerged in the process. Today there is a shift from conventional TV and radio delivery of media content to the internet. Though a decade of innovative public sector reforms in Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) and media sectors of sub-Saharan Africa has brought enormous developments and prospects, there's room for further development. Most of the African economies have also been expanding over the same period, which implies that the consumer base is still expanding, and there are enormous opportunities for the media, mobile and internet sub-sectors. The mobile markets in the sub-Saharan Africa are very competitive with a multiplicity of network operators in each country. Investors from across the world are keeping a watch over the events in the sub-region as new and innovative service offerings are being rolled out year after year. The story isn't different in the media sector. Africa is the second most populous region of the world with over 1 billion inhabitants. Though there has been tremendous growth rates for mobile communications, coupled with some fiber optic cables being laid, market penetration rates for fixed telephony, mobile communications and broadband internet remain relatively low. In the media, most media houses in Africa are yet to harness the full potential of new media enabled by ICT. Real digital opportunities for deployment and utilization in areas such as e-learning, e-health and e-governance, etc. are presented to promote higher literacy, healthy, and well informed societies. It is, therefore, imperative that sub-Saharan Africa positions itself to participate and utilize the ever-evolving opportunities in health delivery, e-learning endeavors, e-commerce, e-governance, new media etc. The conference on 'The Future of Mobile ICT and New Media in Africa' examines these issues regarding the development of mobile ICT and media - markets, regulations, business strategies - as well as issues relating to the use of mobile communications for economic, social, and human development. Participants will come from academia, business, and policy and regulation. The idea is to benefit from input from speakers and participants from Africa as well as Europe and elsewhere. There is a need for Africa to partner and establish cooperation with their counterparts in the areas of research and development, deployment and operations, consultancies and education, as well as learning best practices. Conference Objectives The main objectives of this conference are: · To discuss the developments of mobile communications and media with respect to market developments, policies and regulation, and business potentials and strategies; · To highlight the current challenges encountered in the uptake of new media platforms in Africa; · To examine the need for and use of ICT by educators, health care workers, government officials, business men, researchers, etc. in the sub-region; · To explore ways in which technologies are used and assessed in diverse fields of education, health care, governance, businesses, social networks, banking & finance; · To assess recent methods that enhance access to mobile communications, education, health services, government services, business services such as distance education, computer-based communication methods, telemedicine, e-commerce, face booking, etc.; Who Should Attend Faculty, Teachers, Researchers, Policy makers and Regulators, Health practitioners, Business professionals, ICT practitioners, Instructional designers, Media specialists and producers, Distance learning directors, Technology & Service providers. Topics will include - but not limited to the following: · Mobile communications · Mobile broadband · Information Systems · Role of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) · Application of Information Systems in government and businesses · Age and gender issues in the use of Information Systems · Digital library, distance learning, e-learning systems & technologies · E-health & e-governance · Databases, storage & retrieval systems (e.g. Cloud Computing) · Cyber-security - governance, risk & compliance (GRC), cyber-crime. · E-commerce & e-banking in developing economies · Social media & social networks · Social engineering challenges and counter measures · ICT policy & regulatory environment. · Media policy & regulatory environment Important Dates: · *Deadline for Abstracts: April 1, 2014.* · *Notification of Acceptance: April 7, 2014.* · *Deadline for Full Papers: May 12, 2014.* Submit your abstract / paper to: cmi(a)cmi.aau.dk Registration Can be made at http://www.conf.cmi.aau.dk/current-conference/ . The final programme and otherinformation will be posted on the same website. Organizing committee: Ezer Yeboah-Boateng, GTUC, ezer(a)cmi.aau.dk Osei Darkwa, GTUC, odarkwa(a)gtuc.edu.gh Isa Abdullahi, CMI, abdullah(a)cmi.aau.dk Idongesit Williams, CMI, idong(a)cmi.aau.dk Reza Tadayoni, CMI, reza(a)cmi.aau.dk Anders Henten, CMI, henten(a)cmi.aau.dk Morten Falch, CMI, falch(a)cmi.aau.dk Knud Erik Skouby, CMI, skouby(a)cmi.aau.dk ________________________________________________________________ Professor Nigel Gilbert, ScD, FREng, AcSS, Professor of Sociology, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK. +44 (0)1483 689173 Surrey is 38th in QS World Rankings for Sociology http://goo.gl/xvo77W -- *Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..* P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

PPL discussion
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

resending with proper subject, sorry for that ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> Date: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:06 AM Subject: Re: P2P-Foundation Digest, Vol 39, Issue 25 To: p2p-foundation <p2p-foundation(a)lists.ourproject.org> hi Marco, my own understanding of Commons-Based Reciprocity Licenses differs in many aspects from the PPL For example, I want the commons to work with all forms of not-for-profit oriented busiensses but to call worker-owned businesses as engaging in unlimited exploitation is perinicious such a business works for the workers, and why should it not be able to use commons code ??? > > *Socialist Licenses?* by Stefan Meretz -- From my perspective the > > presentation of the GPL as "communist" is wrong, but this attribution has > > the function to propagate a milder license variant which then is called > > "socialist": the PPL (Peer-Production-License)< > http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License>. > > This license only grants external access to the resources to those who > are > > using them non-commercially, while internally unlimited exploitation is > > allowed. (...) But what is commercial? > > > > That's an important aspect. On the PPL internally unlimited exploitation is > allowed if > > *"You are a workerowned business or workerowned collective".* > IMHO this is not sufficient to describe a Peer Production Organization. Is > needed, as I before stated, a charter to define it. >

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] P2P-Foundation Digest, Vol 39, Issue 25
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

hi Marco, my own understanding of Commons-Based Reciprocity Licenses differs in many aspects from the PPL For example, I want the commons to work with all forms of not-for-profit oriented busiensses but to call worker-owned businesses as engaging in unlimited exploitation is perinicious such a business works for the workers, and why should it not be able to use commons code ??? > > *Socialist Licenses?* by Stefan Meretz -- From my perspective the > > presentation of the GPL as "communist" is wrong, but this attribution has > > the function to propagate a milder license variant which then is called > > "socialist": the PPL (Peer-Production-License)< > http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License>. > > This license only grants external access to the resources to those who > are > > using them non-commercially, while internally unlimited exploitation is > > allowed. (...) But what is commercial? > > > > That's an important aspect. On the PPL internally unlimited exploitation is > allowed if > > *"You are a workerowned business or workerowned collective".* > IMHO this is not sufficient to describe a Peer Production Organization. Is > needed, as I before stated, a charter to define it. >

1 0

Fwd: Article : Fukushima, un désastre illimité
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: 2014-03-17 6:10 GMT-05:00 Subject: Article : Fukushima, un désastre illimité To: "econowmix(a)googlegroups.com" <econowmix(a)googlegroups.com> http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-un-desast… Fukushima, un désastre illimité Ça y est, 3 ans viennent de s'écouler, et le bilan est accablant. Accablant d'abord parce permanent en ce qui concerne les puissants rejets radioactifs, accablant aussi car le démantèlement patauge, les cuves se remplissent d'eau polluée, les fuites via l'océan se multiplient, et parce que la radioactivité dépasse largement le cadre japonais. Même si les médias européens ont largement mis l'étouffoir sur la situation, laissant envisager que tout est en train de se régler, et qu'il faudra seulement donner du temps au temps, certains médias ont finalement compris que nous nous dirigions vers une contamination planétaire, comme le révélait sur l'antenne de *Fr3*, le *26 février dernier*, à *23h15*, *Lionel de Coninck*, dans l'émission << *pièces à conviction* >>. lien<http://www.francetvinfo.fr/monde/environnement/video-fukushima-vers-une-con…> On sait aujourd'hui, d'après un rapport réalisé par le ministère russe de la défense, que *2 explosions atomiques souterraines* ont eu lieu à *Fukushima* le *31 décembre 2013* : la première avait une intensité de *5,1*, et l'autre de *3,6* sur l'échelle de Richter. A titre de comparaison, la bombe d'*Hiroshima* correspondait à un séisme d'une magnitude de *6*. Dans ce même rapport, on apprend aussi que l'architecte du *réacteur n°3*avait averti dès le *17 novembre 2011* qu'une explosion hydro-volcanique était inévitable en raison du combustible fondu qui s'échappait de la cuve du réacteur. lien<http://www.prorussia.tv/Les-consequences-de-la-catastrophe-de-Fukushima-dep…> Seule la volonté des gouvernements désireux de ne pas << provoquer de panique >> serait responsable du silence coupable des médias traditionnels à qui la consigne a été donnée de ne pas affoler les populations. Pour toutes ces raisons, le lobby nucléaire se réuni discrètement à l'*Espace Cap 15, 1-15 quai de Grenelle*, à *Paris*, le *11 mars*, (lien<http://www-pub.iaea.org/iaeameetings/cn224p/Session2/LazoNEA.pdf>) afin de peaufiner la stratégie qui consiste à rassurer toujours et encore les populations menacées, ce qui explique la volonté des autorités japonaises d'encourager les populations à retourner dans les zones polluées alors que la radioactivité de celles-ci y est *4 fois supérieure* à celle autorisée pour les travailleurs du nucléaire, soit *20 mSv/an*. lien<http://blogs.mediapart.fr/edition/japon-un-seisme-mondial/article/040314/fu…> Ce séminaire des lobbyistes nucléaires japonais et français a réuni des membres du comité *CIPR*, et des membres de *NPO*. On note au programme de cette journée la << *réhabilitation de l'école primaire de Tonimari* >>, << *de la radiobiologie pour servir les gens de Fukushima* >>, ou encore << *l'endroit où l'on appartient * >>...outre le déjeuner prévu à *13 h*, la journée sera close par un cocktail, à *18h30*. A *Fukushima*, les inquiétudes concernent toujours la vidange de la piscine de stockage du réacteur *n°4*, pour laquelle *Tepco* s'est donné *2 ans*pour transvaser les barres combustibles de cette piscine, à une autre, au sol celle là. Le *25 février* dernier, un court circuit a provoqué l'arrêt du refroidissement de cette piscine, ce qui a provoqué la suspension du retrait des assemblages pendant *4 heures*. lien<http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2014/1234483_5892.html> Pour l'instant, à la date du *9 mars*, *Tepco* a réussi à sortir *462 assemblages* sur les *1 533 <1%C2%A0533> assemblages* de cette piscine, soit *19 transports* effectués. lien<http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/decommision/index-e.html> Il faudra ensuite sortir tous les assemblages restant dans les autres piscines, et le calendrier prévu semble difficile à respecter. lien<http://www.irsn.fr/FR/connaissances/Installations_nucleaires/Les-accidents-…> Une autre problématique concerne le *réacteur n°3*, car le corium en fusion contient du plutonium, grâce à la << générosité >> de l'industrie nucléaire française. Or ce corium est toujours introuvable, et comme la période du plutonium est de * 24 000 an*, il sera dangereux pendant au moins *100 000 ans*. Des niveaux de radioactivité intenses sont mesurés régulièrement dans ce secteur, empêchant toute présence humaine prolongée. C'est l'occasion de remarquer qu'alors que le personnel << officiel >> de l'entreprise nucléaire japonaise n'a pas pris plus de *5 mSv* en un mois, *247 employés* sous-traitants ont largement dépassé cette mesure. lien<http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/betu14_e/images/140228e010…> A ce jour, ils sont plus de *32 000* à être intervenus sur le site. Un autre souci concerne les *450 000 tonnes d'eau radioactive* stockée dans *1200 <1200> énormes réservoirs* (lien<http://www.romandie.com/news/n/_Fukushima_3_ans_apres_le_pire_est_passe_mai…>) sujets à des fuites à répétition, provoquant des rejets radioactifs dans l'océan, et contaminant ainsi de nombreuses espèces marines. Lors d'un prélèvement effectué le *2 mars*, on a mesuré une contamination en tritium de *950 Bq/L*, et dans le *puits E3* l'eau pompée dans le souterrain atteint *3 500 Bq/L* de tritium. lien<http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2014/images/around_h4_1403…> Passons maintenant aux travaux de << décontamination >>, avec l'enlèvement d'une petite partie de la terre contaminée, stockée dans des sacs plastiques sur une aire de plusieurs hectares, laquelle terre devra être transvasée dans quelques années dans d'autres sacs, ceux-ci étant biodégradables. D'ailleurs ce stockage est problématique car de nombreuses agglomérations s'opposent à celui-ci, et rien que dans le grand *Tokyo* les boues radioactives des cendres d'incinérateurs se comptent en milliers de tonnes et contiennent plus de *8000 Bq/kg* en césium. Dans la province de *Chiba*, il y en a *3612 tonnes*, dans celle *Tokyo*, on en compte *982 tonnes*, dans celle de *Saïtama*, *245 tonnes*. En totalité, pour l'instant, on dénombre *140 843 tonnes de déchets radioactifs* réparties dans *12 provinces*. lien<http://www.acro.eu.org/chronoFukushima.html> Une autre préoccupation est l'élargissement de la zone contaminée à plusieurs partie du globe, car d'une part, depuis *3 ans*, la radioactivité continue de se répandre, sans qu'il soit possible de la stopper, et d'autre part, les animaux, dont surtout les poissons, parcourent parfois de grandes distances, véhiculant ainsi la pollution japonaise jusqu'aux cotes australiennes, ou américaines. lien<http://rustyjames.canalblog.com/archives/2013/10/18/28235649.html> La dernière inquiétude, et pas le moindre, concerne la décision des pouvoirs publics japonais encourageant les populations à retourner dans les zones contaminées alors que la radioactivité de celles-ci y est *4 fois supérieure* à celle autorisée pour les travailleurs du nucléaire, soit *20 mSv/an*. lien<http://blogs.mediapart.fr/edition/japon-un-seisme-mondial/article/040314/fu…> Aujourd'hui, s'il faut en croire une modélisation qu'a fait *Météo-France*, tout l'hémisphère nord est concerné par les rejets toxiques et invisibles de la centrale dévastée. carte<http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Fukushima-_Panache…> Le panache radioactif a atteint la côte ouest des *Etats Unis* dès le *16 mars 2011*, les *Antilles françaises* à partir du *21 mars*, le nord de la *Grande Bretagne* dès le *22 mars*, et la *France* le *24 mars 2011*. lien<http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_nucl%C3%A9aire_de_Fukushima> Si à l'époque la concentration de césium était trop faible, il est probable que depuis *3 ans*, celle-ci ne soit plus négligeable. Les poissons péchés au large de la *Californie* en apportent la preuve. lien<http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2012/05/29/des-thons-rouges-contamine…> Pas étonnant des lors que pendant *50 jours*, en *France*, et pas seulement, les populations inquiètes aient décidé de commémorer les catastrophes de *Tchernobyl* et de *Fukushima*. En *Alsace*, des ponts ont été occupés par *7000 citoyens responsables*, bloquant pendant une heure la circulation, et réclamant l'arrêt immédiat de *Fessenheim*, sans attendre les promesses présidentielles actées pour *2016*. lien<http://www.ouest-france.fr/nucleaire-3500-militants-manifestent-contre-fess…> La même demande a été faite pour la centrale de *Bugey*, celle du *Tricastin*, et pour quelques autres toutes aussi menaçantes. Ailleurs ce sont des conférences, des films, des débats, des manifestations, des marches et surtout des opérations << *ronds points* >>, puisqu'aux quatre coins du pays, les ronds points ont été investis avec forces banderoles et pancartes, tentant d'alerter les français du danger qui les menace, puisque notre pays est pour une fois champion... en densité de centrales nucléaires sur le territoire national, que certaines cuves de réacteurs présentent de fissures, et que les << incidents >> se multiplient exponentiellement en proportion de la vétusté des centrales nucléaires. lien<http://grenoble.greenpeace.fr/grande-action-rond-point-le-samedi-8-mars-201…> La liste des manifestations prévues est sur ce lien<http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/lancement-50-jours> . Auparavant, *Greenpeace* avait mobilisé *240 militants* dans des actions spectaculaires. lien<http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2014/03/05/greenpeace-s-attaque-aux-c…> Au *Japon*, des dizaines de milliers de personnes ont manifesté à *Tokyo*le *9 mars*. lien<http://www.leparisien.fr/environnement/en-images-fukushima-3-ans-apres-la-c…> En *France*, il est pourtant question d'engager *300 milliards* pour tenter de rénover les vieux réacteurs, et on ne peut que regretter que cette manne ne soit pas plutôt investie dans le développement des énergies propres. Il y a malgré tout de bonnes nouvelles : l'industrie nucléaire mondiale est entrée dans une phase de déclin brutale et irréversible puisque la part du nucléaire dans l'électricité mondiale s'est effondrée passant de *17%* à *9%* aujourd'hui, et le réacteur *EPR* finlandais est en cours d'abandon par *AREVA*. lien <http://observ.nucleaire.free.fr/> D'après l'*ACRO*, le *Japon* espère profiter de la catastrophe du *11 mars 2011* pour devenir le leader mondial dans le domaine du démantèlement nucléaire. lien <http://www.acro.eu.org/chronoFukushima.html> En effet, il reste dans le monde plus de *400 réacteurs nucléaires*, souvent vétustes, aux cuves parfois fissurées, faisant quelquefois l'objet de défauts de fabrication, menacés par des secousses sismiques, par des barrages défaillants,(lien<http://enenews.com/emergency-response-plan-activated-after-massive-crack-fo…>) ou tout simplement sujets à des erreurs humaines, ce qui a décidé des citoyens responsables à engager un jeune pendant toute la journée du *11 mars 2014*. lien<http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/09/fasting-fukushima-third-anniversary/> Comme l'a écrit *Genyu Sokya*, moine zen, chef du temple de *Fukuju-ji*, écrivain et essayiste réputé, dans un recueil de nouvelles à paraitre (*la Montagne de lumière*) : << *des victimes condamnées à vivre un désastre illimité * >> (lien<http://www.lemonde.fr/japon/article/2014/03/10/fukushima-des-victimes-conda…>) et comme dit mon vieil ami africain : << *une pirogue n'est jamais trop grande pour chavirer * >>. *L'image illustrant l'article vient de << www.japonation.com&nbsp ;... <http://www.japonation.com &raquo> ;* *Merci aux internautes pour leur aide précieuse.* *Olivier Cabanel* *Articles anciens* *Tchernobyl, drôle d'anniversaire <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/tchernobyl-drole-d-…> (12 mars 2011)* *Fukushima, mon amour <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-mon-amour…>* *Fukushima, Sarko pète les plombs <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-sarko-pet…>* *Fukushima, et maintenant ? <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-et-mainte…>* *Fukushima, nuages noirs à l'horizon <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-nuages-no…>* *Entre fusion et confusion <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/politique/article/entre-fusion-et-confusi…>* *Fukushima, le monde du silence <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-le-monde-…>* *Au pays du soleil, le Vent ! <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/au-pays-du-soleil-l…>* *Fukushima, le syndrome Japonais <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-le-syndro…>* *Fukushima, la fuite en avant <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-la-fuite-…>* *Fukushima, plus jamais ça <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-plus-jama…>* *C'est foutu...shima <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/c-est-foutu-shima-9…>* *L'exode nucléaire <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/citoyennete/article/l-exode-nucleaire-927…>* *Ça fume à Fukushima <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/ca-fume-a-fukushima…>* *Nucléaire, la cible terroriste <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/societe/article/nucleaire-la-cible-terror…>* *Fukushima, le mensonge organisé <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-le-menson…>* *Faire reculer le crabe <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/sante/article/faire-reculer-le-crabe-94875>* *Le Japon bientôt inhabitable ? <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/le-japon-bientot-in…>* *Le silence des salauds <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/medias/article/le-silence-des-salauds-969…>* *On a retrouvé le corium de Fukushima <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/on-a-retrouve-le-co…>* *La France a peur <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/la-france-a-peur-99…>* *Fukushima, tragédie en sous sol <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-tragedie-…>* *Fukushima, tournée mondiale <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-tournee-m…>* *Fukushima, un silence inquiétant <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-un-silenc…>* *Fukushima, le début de la fin <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-le-debut-…>* *Nucléaire, explosion des prix <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/nucleaire-explosion…>* *Penly du feu et des flammes <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/penly-du-feu-et-des…>* *Les normes sont-elles normales ? <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/sante/article/les-normes-sont-elles-norma…>* *Fukushima, quand c'est fini, ça recommence <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-quand-c-e…>* *Fukushima, l'en pire Japonais <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-l-en-pire…>* *Le mensonge nucléaire de sarközy <http://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/le-mensonge-nucleaire-de-sarko…> * *Palmiers contre nucléaire <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/palmiers-contre-nuc…>* *Promo nucléaire : pour toute centrale achetée, leucémie en prime ! <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/sante/article/promo-nucleaire-pour-toute-…>* *Fukushima, les limites du cynisme <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-les-limit…>* *Ce cher nucléaire <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/economie/article/ce-cher-nucleaire-98793>* *Nucléaire, de la fission aux fissures <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/technologies/article/nucleaire-de-la-fiss…>* *La fable du thorium <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/technologies/article/la-fable-du-thorium-…>* *L'hallali nucléaire <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/l-hallali-nucleaire…>* *Fukushima, la stratégie de l'oubli <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/societe/article/fukushima-la-strategie-de…>* *Fukushima s'enfonce-t-il ? <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-s-enfonce…>* *Fukushima hors contröle <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-hors-cont…>* *Fukushima, le pire des scénarios <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-le-pire-d…>* *Fukushima, le tonneau des Danaïdes <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-le-tonnea…>* *Fukushima, réaction en chaîne à ciel ouvert <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-reaction-…>* *Fukushima, le mois de tous les dangers <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/international/article/fukushima-le-mois-d…>* *Fukushima, la loi du silence <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-la-loi-du…> * *Fukushima, l'illusion d'une solution <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/fukushima-l-illusio…>* *Tchernobyl, Fukushima, à qui le tour ? <http://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/environnement/article/tchernobyl-fukushim…>* *Une pétition <http://www.change.org/FortdeVaujours> à signer concernant le fort de Vaujours* *Sites à consulter* *L'observatoire du nucléaire <http://observ.nucleaire.free.fr/abandon-epr-finlande.htm>* *Greenpeace <http://energie-climat.greenpeace.fr/tag/nucleaire?gclid=CNfm1KaU-7wCFWvjwgo…>* *Site d'ACRO <http://www.acro.eu.org/chronoFukushima.html> (infos au jour le jour)* *Fukushima-blog <http://www.fukushima-blog.com/>* ------------------------------ Sur le même thème*Fukushima, la loi du silence*<http://www.agoravox.fr/article145266> *Fukushima, réaction en chaîne à ciel ouvert?*<http://www.agoravox.fr/article141613> *Fukushima, le mois de tous les dangers*<http://www.agoravox.fr/article143930> *Fukushima, l'illusion d'une solution*<http://www.agoravox.fr/article145909> *PropaGandhi contre Propaganda* <http://www.agoravox.fr/article147960> ------------------------------ -- *Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..* P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

Responding to Stefan Meretz
by Michel Bauwens 17 Mar '14

17 Mar '14

a cleaner version of my response, which will be published on march 20 on the p2p blog: Responding to Stefan Meretz's critique of the Peer Production License<http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=37660> [image: photo of Michel Bauwens] Michel Bauwens 17th March 2014 *Stefan Meretz* produced a critique of the Peer Production License<http://keimform.de/2014/socialist-licenses/>, or more generically, Commons-Based Reciprocity Licenses, in the Keimform blog, to which I promised to respond. Unfortunately, the critique is rather weak and misleading, so our responses will be rather short and inserted inline. Our responses are in bold and b-quote. For context, I support the PPL, not in its full detail, but as a first of a kind, Commons-Based Reciprocity License (the concept is from Primavera de Filippi and Miguel Veira). The key argument is the following: the present fully-sharing open licenses which allow unrestricted commercial exploitation create a 'communism of capital', i.e. a sphere of open knowledge, code and design, which is subsumed to the present dominant political economy. But what we need is an autonomous sphere of peer production, in which commoners and peer producers can create their own livelyhood, while staying in the sphere of the commons. In other words, we need a 'capital for the commons'. The best way to achieve that is to converge the sphere of immaterial commons contributions, with a sphere of cooperative accumulation through which the surplus value can stay within the sphere of commons/cooperative production. This is why we need a new type of licensing. So, without further ado, Stefan Meretz writes: "At first one has to understand the nature licenses have under the given conditions. Licenses are permissions, thus contracts, "granted by a party ('licensor') to another party ('licensee') as an element of an agreement between those parties". It bases on the precondition of excluding all other people by the "rightholder". The power of exclusion given by law can be converted into a "permission for all" by way of tricky constructions combined with the obligation to put derived works under the GPL as well (copyleft principle). Herein is nothing communist. The logic of exclusion is partially reversed and therefore new spaces of commons oriented practices can be created. Better than nothing. The license itself only protects these practices against proprietary destructions. From my point of view this can not be more under the given conditions. The outer world is ruled by the logics of valuation and exclusion, and every free zone to self-determine other practices has to be wrested from these dominant logics. Embryonic forms, precisely." *This first critique is rather weak. Indeed, I am not talking about the legal, contractual basis of the GPL and similar licenses, but on the social logic that they enable, which is: it allows anybody to contribute, and it allows anybody to use. This is both consistent with Marx's defintion of communism, and with the definition I use, that of communal shareholding by Alan Page Fiske. This logic of course only exists in the realm of abundant digital information, but it exists within the sphere of the political economy of capital*. To deny this on the grounds of legal technicalities seems to me a feeble argument. The second part of the thesis "...the more capitalistic the practice" fails as well. There is no comparative of "capitalistic". If you replace "capitalistic" with "commodity-based", then is becomes even clearer: Something is a commodity or not. Free software, for instance, isn't a commodity. It can be appropriated and used by everyone, even by big corporations. However, they cannot transform the free software into a commodity, since this is prevented by the GPL. But they can use the software in order to realize their business models in another fields. This free use is a thorn in Bauwens side. He wants the commons to only be commercially used by those who have contributed beforehand. *This is also very weak, since I am not saying and never said, that the GPL turns free sofrware into a commodity. But what I'm saying, and what nobody can deny, is that non-commodified free software is subsumed to the capitalist economy that uses it. There is a thriving commercial company of products and services which is using and is based on GPL-generated code, as there is on open design. 75% of Linux developers are paid by commercial companies operating in the capitalist marketplace.* >From my perspective the presentation of the GPL as "communist" is wrong, but this attribution has the function to propagate a milder license variant which then is called "socialist": the PPL (Peer-Production-License). This license only grants external access to the resources to those who are using them non-commercially, while internally unlimited exploitation is allowed. The divide intern/extern usually refers to a firm. If external parties want to use the resources commercially, then they have to pay a license fee or make other contributions. *The GPL effectively enables a social logic of unlimited use, including by multinational companies. The peer production license resticts it. From my point of view this makes it a stronger and not a milder license. Let me point out that I do not take the PPL as perfect, but as a new kind of Commons-Based Reciprocity Licenses, whose detailed modalities can very well differ from the original PPL. Such licenses fully allow commercial exploitation, but ask for reciprocity. Think of a traditional indigenous community using a GPL of similar. This means any commercial entity can use the knowledge and commercialize it, without any benefit or profit-sharing with the creators of the knowledge. A CBRL would simply ask for reciprocity and would allow these traditional communities to generate autonomous living and livelyhoods, something which is impossible with the GPL*. Is only exchange reciprocal? In order to justify the PPL the argument of reciprocity is claimed. The "communist" GPL is non-reciprocal, while the "socialist" PPL demands reciprocity. The word reciprocity nicely blurs what is actually meant: exchange. In fact, the GPL breaks the logic of exchange, while the PPL requires and enforces it -- namely not only the exchange logic itself, but the societally valid form of equivalent exchange. Someone who wants to keep "the surplus value into the commons sphere" has to act that way, whereby "commons sphere" is a euphemism for an ordinary company. *This is the first valid critique. Indeed, the PPL / CBRL would indeed limit the non-reciprocity for for-profit entities, but no, Stefan is wrong, it does not demand equivalent exchange, but only some form of negotiated reciprocity. The important aspect is to generate a flow of realized value, necessary for social reproduction, from the sphere of capital accumulation to the sphere of the commons. The second aspect is organizational. It promotes the self-organisation of an ethical economy, and makes those who want to join it, conscious of that fact, including for-profit companies which can decide to ally with the ethical enterpreneurial coalition*. The notion of reciprocity is misused in an ideologically blurring way. Licenses are never reciprocal, only people can behave that way. Thus, the question can only be whether licenses encourage reciprocity between people or not, and if so, in what way. Then the evaluation of GPL and PPL looks completely different.The GPL creates and promotes direct reciprocity between people, because no exchange and also no compelled contribution stands between people. *This is absolutely wrong, the GPL doesn't demand nor create direct reciprocity between people. It is entirely possible to use GPL material without any reciprocity, as the overwhelming majority of its users actually do. But the GPL requires what anthropologist call 'general reciprocity', i.e. at the collective level, a minimum of contributions is needed to sustain the system. But there is absolutely no requirement for direct reciprocity. The reciprocity is between the individual and the system as a whole. A coder or wikipedia contributor cannot expect any return from any particular individual but only expects the benefits of the whole system, which depend only on a general flow of contributions.* By contrast, the PPL limits direct reciprocity by putting exchange or compulsory contributions between people if they want to use resources commercially. But what is commercial? It is the same discussion which has taken place around the NC module of the Creative Commons Licenses. There the insight is: The NC module undermines sharing, and the same applies to the PPL (although trying to dissociate from the CC-NC). *The PPL only limits non-recicprocal use by for-profit companies. It does not prohibit commercial exploitation but actually encourages it, while the Non-Commercial CC license actually prohibits it. The NC does not undermine sharing, but commercialisation. The PPL encourages and allows both sharing and commercialisation.* To sharpen the point: Both licenses support reciprocal behavior of people. With respect to GPL it is positive reciprocity, because in this case it only counts how people behave socially and which rules they agree upon in a self-determined way, in order to bring all participants together. Concerning the PPL it is negative reciprocity, since a portion of people are subjugated to the alien form of exchange of equivalents (money) and are excluded from the cooperation to this end. Thus, the GPL is rather in accordance with the commons idea of self-determining own rules than the PPL. *From the above refutations follow that this conclusion is entirely erroneous. In fact, there is only self-determination of the contributory process in the GPL context, but full alienation to capital in the surrounding commercial sphere. By contrast the PPL not only allows full self-determination in the contributory sphere, but requires self-management in the cooperative sphere of self-reproduction, something which is much more difficult with the GPL, since it subsumes livelyhoods to capital accumulation.* This is the end of my response to the first part of the critique by Stefan Meretz. The critique in no way refutes any of the premises for the need of the PPL or similar Commos-Based Reciprocity Licenses. -- *Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..* P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

1 0

P2PF issue based blogs
by Marco Giustini 16 Mar '14

16 Mar '14

Hi all. I wish to propose to start issue based blogs on the actually unused domain p2pf.net I donated to the community. We could make a multiuser wordpress installation with subdomains, so to have the ability to create blogs on issues. Actually there's an interesting discussion on p2p facebook group about cryptocurrencies. My proposal is to start the first issue based blog on cryptocurrencies, calling it p2pcoin.p2pf.net All the issue based blogs would be "unofficial" blogs of p2pfoundation, so IMHO editor rights could be more free. I propose to ask participants to discussion on p2p facebook group to become editors of this blog. To start, the blog could a sort of aggregator of articles on cryptocurrencies and then, if there will be participation it will be possible also to start community tools (i.e. buddypress and soon) and/or reposting of facebook groups. If the community is interested, James or Javier could make the installation. M

5 6