January 2015 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: Citations for "value equation"
by Michel Bauwens 15 Jan '15

15 Jan '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bob Haugen <bob.haugen(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:46 PM Subject: Re: Citations for "value equation" To: Tiberius Brastaviceanu <tiberius.brastaviceanu(a)gmail.com> Cc: Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net>, Kurt Laitner < klaitner(a)gmail.com>, Lynn Foster <foster.j.lynn(a)gmail.com>, Caroline Stiegler <caroline.stiegler(a)gmail.com>, Bernard Stiegler < bernard.stiegler(a)centrepompidou.fr> The Value Equation tutorial is now public, as promised. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1h-t6p55KTK-zlXIH9gUG6TYiwj1ARk4dq0_… Please let us know if you have any problems accessing it, or if you have suggestions for improvement, or want to comment on the document itself. On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks a lot. I started a github wiki page, citing the referata wiki page: > https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/wiki/Value-Equations > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Tiberius Brastaviceanu > <tiberius.brastaviceanu(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I saved some info in the value equation OVN wiki page >> http://valuenetwork.referata.com/wiki/The_Value_Equation#Background >> >> I also linked Lynn's document on value equation on this page, which is >> itself linked on the main value equation page. >> >> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net > >> wrote: >>> >>> ok thanks! >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 9:42 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Give us until Jan 15 before (for example) publishing on P2PFoundation? >>>> >>>> In the meantime, feel free to share it with anybody who wants to join the >>>> conversation. It's public-on-the-web now, and if people want to comment on >>>> the document itself, we can give them permission. Maybe open up a copy for >>>> both commenting and editing, if people want to get deep into it. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Michel Bauwens >>>> <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> when will this be shareable ? >>>>> >>>>> Michel >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen(a)gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess we should have known that Kurt would appear in that fascinating >>>>>> origin story. >>>>>> >>>>>> So here's a question, which I hope will stimulate a longer conversation >>>>>> than an email thread, and may want to find another medium or two: >>>>>> >>>>>> We are close to having an actual value equation up and running. Just >>>>>> starting to implement the actual distributions, but most of the structure >>>>>> and logic is in place. >>>>>> >>>>>> It probably differs from what any of the originators had in mind. >>>>>> Partly because we don't yet have some of the components people had in mind, >>>>>> maybe because Tibi's ideas and/or the situation at Sensorica have changed, >>>>>> and certainly because we are trying to design it in a general enough way to >>>>>> handle all of the value equation ideas of the current groups that want to >>>>>> use it. (And also probably because of lacks of skill and imagination...) >>>>>> >>>>>> We will be documenting it in a lot of detail. Here's the first >>>>>> installment, much more to come: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1h-t6p55KTK-zlXIH9gUG6TYiwj1ARk4dq0_… >>>>>> >>>>>> So we want to know what you all think about it. We think this is a >>>>>> transformative idea (which is why we want the history to be part of the >>>>>> documentation), and it needs a lot of ongoing thought and development (in >>>>>> the sense of child development). >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Kurt Laitner <klaitner(a)gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks tibi for noticing :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have used "value equation" and "value networks" since the early >>>>>>> 2000's in conversations about *net (after i forked the idea from my >>>>>>> colleague's concept of 'powernet' who wanted to create a for-profit platform >>>>>>> to take percentages of each transaction). We call something similar to *net >>>>>>> "OVN's" (though the NRP concept is probably closer to *net than OVN is as >>>>>>> *net is a platform with parametrized algorithms based on value accumulation >>>>>>> in standardized value dimensions whose accumulations are determined through >>>>>>> integration with all intermediating communications tech). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am still not familiar with stiegler's work, though I have seen his >>>>>>> name mentioned many times in my travels (and here he is again!). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My concept of value equations is a dimensional weighted sum of 'pure' >>>>>>> measures of value (not 'subjective Value' or the fictitious 'objective >>>>>>> Value', though these can be derived from pure value by inspection and >>>>>>> interpretation). These dimensions are measures of activities that increase >>>>>>> the probability of value creation, not the post facto priced exchange value >>>>>>> of whatever is produced, not the subjective experience of value of >>>>>>> participants. Exchange is a special event that triggers distribution of >>>>>>> whatever exchange value is offered (which is either an abstract value like >>>>>>> money or something of subjective value to the recipient such as reputation). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The term 'value accounting' came up in convos of the SENSORICA mailing >>>>>>> list. I am not sure who named it but i found it to resonate deeply with the >>>>>>> conception of *net as a way to track relative value contributed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Much later Michel suggested 'contributory value accounting' as a topic >>>>>>> I should write about and I like that term very much as it describes quite >>>>>>> accurately the point of 'powernet' as it was conceived by myself and my >>>>>>> colleague Reg Cheramy in the late 90's. The motivation for my sticking the >>>>>>> wildcard symbol * in front instead of power is that any flow can be >>>>>>> directed, not just power. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The new focus on the governance aspect evolved with my experiences >>>>>>> with SENSORICA and other value networks, who all ultimately hit governance >>>>>>> issues long before distribution of revenue questions. The notion of >>>>>>> decision making rights based on relative value contributed has always been a >>>>>>> part of powernet (the power part) but its importance and priority over the >>>>>>> revenue distribution piece has become clear over time and I coined the term >>>>>>> 'governance equation' to reflect the symmetry of this concept with the >>>>>>> 'value equation'. The value equation is better framed as a 'distribution >>>>>>> equation' for revenue (cash for now) as opposed to the governance equation >>>>>>> as a distribution equation for voting rights. One can see many flavors of >>>>>>> distribution equation to control various flows. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have never published formally and any ideas I have are a result of >>>>>>> my experiences in this world, and things I have read and of course how they >>>>>>> bounce off my unique existence. When the frog hits the water there is a >>>>>>> splash. There is no merit in it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have never published and never researched what was already known in >>>>>>> the subject area, and so I cannot complain when someone says the wheel I >>>>>>> invented "from scratch" turns out to be highly derivative (what a shocker!). >>>>>>> Indeed I don't even care. The point is to get a working model of OVN's, so >>>>>>> we can all attribute better in the future. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As a matter of history though I can say that stiegler has had no >>>>>>> direct influence on me (indirect..who knows?). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> /kdl >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Dec 27, 2014 12:51 PM, "Tiberius Brastaviceanu" >>>>>>> <tiberius.brastaviceanu(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Bob, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think it is accurate to say that Bernard Stiegler had a >>>>>>>> direct influence on the development of SENSORICA. I personally discovered >>>>>>>> him perhaps a year ago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The concepts and the language were developed in collaboration. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The precursor of the OVN model is the "Discovery Network" model that >>>>>>>> I proposed in September 2010. The term used was value exchange system, >>>>>>>> instead of value accounting system. At this moment, the concept of value >>>>>>>> equation was not formed. As you can see in the document, the allocation of >>>>>>>> equity was governed by a set of rules through a mechanism of negotiation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The first document that described the OVN model is the Value System >>>>>>>> document. It was first created in April 2011. The expression valuation >>>>>>>> mechanism was used to name of the section that mentioned a mathematical >>>>>>>> formula for calculating fluid equity. So the idea of a mathematical formula, >>>>>>>> an equation, was there from the beginning. For an entire year, there were >>>>>>>> discussions between myself, Steve, Kurt and Bayle about how to calculate it. >>>>>>>> See the attached screenshot. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I introduced the expression "value accounting system" in this doc, on >>>>>>>> March 02, 2012. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On March 13, 2012 the expression "value equation" appears in the doc >>>>>>>> for the first time, in conjunction with a comment made by Kurt on the >>>>>>>> mailing list. The earliest occurrence of the expression "value equation" in >>>>>>>> SENSORICA's mailing list is in early September 2011, used by Kurt again. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kurt later proposed the concept of "governance equation". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is what I got doing my little investigation. Isn't it nice to >>>>>>>> have history recorded?! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Michel Bauwens >>>>>>>> <michel(a)p2pfoundation.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Interesting to know indeed if Stiegler's work has been influential >>>>>>>>> on the open value accounting idea >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> you will have noticed it is mentioned in my annual review here, >>>>>>>>> http://p2pfoundation.net/Top_Ten_P2P_Trends_of_2014 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Bernard: can you point us to english material on your work, >>>>>>>>> especially on your concept of the 'revenu contributif', which I would like >>>>>>>>> to give more support in the coming year ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> for info on those who missed it: >>>>>>>>> http://p2pfoundation.net/What_the_P2P_Foundation_Did_in_2014 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Michel >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 10:09 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen(a)gmail.com > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Adding Michel to this message, because I want to broaden the >>>>>>>>>> question. >>>>>>>>>> I think the value equation might have some roots in Bernard >>>>>>>>>> Stiegler's >>>>>>>>>> concept of the economy of contribution. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Do you all think this is accurate? Were Stiegler's ideas a direct >>>>>>>>>> influence on Sensorica, or more like an idea in the air like a >>>>>>>>>> wind-blown seed that falls on ready soil, or not in the picture? Or >>>>>>>>>> am >>>>>>>>>> I missing something else, or misunderstanding completely? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen(a)gmail.com > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> > I mean not only the name but also the idea. >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > As far as I know, they both originated at Sensorica. Probably >>>>>>>>>> > with >>>>>>>>>> > you. Do you know different? >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > I'm adding some background to our value equation tutorial and >>>>>>>>>> > incidental writings. So I guess the proper question is, how do >>>>>>>>>> > you >>>>>>>>>> > want to be cited? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>>>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; >>>>>>>>> http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> t!b! >>>>>>>> co-founder of SENSORICA, >>>>>>>> an open, decentralized and self-organizing >>>>>>>> value network (an open enterprise) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> founder of Multitude Project >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Google Profile >>>>>>>> Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu >>>>>>>> Twitter @TiberiusB >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>>>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>>>> >>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - >>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>>>> >>>>> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>>>> >>>>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: >>> http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan >>> >>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net >>> >>> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens >>> >>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> t!b! >> co-founder of SENSORICA, >> an open, decentralized and self-organizing >> value network (an open enterprise) >> >> founder of Multitude Project >> >> Google Profile >> Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu >> Twitter @TiberiusB -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: Free Libre Open Access working class self-learning
by Michel Bauwens 15 Jan '15

15 Jan '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Örsan Şenalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [Networkedlabour] [P2P-F] Fwd: Free Libre Open Access working class self-learning To: Anna Harris <anna(a)shsh.co.uk> Cc: "networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org" <networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org > Hi Anna, thanks for the reply and feedback! It souds much better to me to be honest also to break with the mental-manual labour division which I see as the beginning of the wrong path we took as human civilisation, or forced to take. I do not the expertise at the moment to argue this with references to etnnogrpahic and antropologic sources, but it is kind of obvious that in case we do not manage this, we wil be reproducing today's and future's class divisions and struggles. I think and belive the method of self- and mutual-learning by exchange and by adding on top of what we each already know, and having a shared commons produced by those recognise each others as peers -class division reproduction free- like we do it on the e-lists and social networks. So can I please add this proposal to the draft list of offered courses,with your name as tutor? Meanwhile I just gave a concrete form to the overall project and submitted the below proposal to Coopfunding.net, a cooperative funding project developed by Catalan Integral Coperative. As you will see your course fits perfectly to the objective: "GNUnion aims at 1. Creating one big mesh network for the working people from the Global South and Global North by linking autonomous networks and communities of high-tech/knowledge, industrial and service workers; domestic, immigrant, rural, jobless and future workers; solidarity, activism and research networks; labour, environmental, social justice and information freedom activists, 2. Hyper-, and self-empowerment of the individual nodes and networks involved, 3. Emancipation of human labour, creativity and potential from current dominant system, based on waged slavery, by mesh networking existing and working alternatives and building new ones, 4. Combining labour, digital, creative and media activism to confront system with transnationally meshed, systemic and strategic mass actions, The network of the projects we design and develop focuses on self-organizing and connecting like-minded peers and their network bases to each other strategically and synergetically. To this end we build dynamic, free, libre, and open access spaces and tools through which our collective agendas, struggles, and energies can entangle with each other, and we can act upon them harmonically. Variety of projects listed below invites like minded peers to use the individual social and communicational power they have and collaborate around dynamic, creative and positive projects empowering them. By combining peer to peer social dynamics and technologies, and embedding them into our internal and external processes and relations we ultimately target global emancipation of labour and the commons from the capital, by empowering all the single nodes joining in collaborating creation of a commons humanity. Read the rest here: https://gnunion.wordpress.com/2015/01/14/gnuniting-for-the-commons-humanity/ " I would like to communicate details futher, may be on skype or somthing else, will email you to arrange a call! talk soon, Orsan On 13 January 2015 at 18:07, Anna Harris <anna(a)shsh.co.uk> wrote: > > Hello Orsan and all, > > I welcome this invitation to pool our resources, asking us to offer whatever > we may have to contribute. > > Transformative Circles > > 'What transforms a meeting into a circle is the willingness of people to > shift from informal socializing or opinionated discussion into a receptive > attitude of thoughtful speaking and deep listening. (Peerspirit.com) > > 'The main objective of collective thought is constructing. This meaning, two > people with different ideas combining their energy in order to build > something. Then, it is not about my idea or yours. It will be the two ideas > together that produce a new outcome that we did not know about in the first > place. This is why active listening in which we are not just preparing for > our next intervention is so necessary. Collective thought is born once we > understand that every opinion, ours and those different to ours, all of > them, are needed in order to generate the idea of consensus; an idea which, > after being indirectly constructed, will transform us.' (Sol text for > assemblies) > > For a few years now I have been participating in groups which provide a > regular space for people to share what is going on for them in their lives, > where they can express something about the challenges of their personal > journey, in an atmosphere of acceptance, without judgement, approval or > disapproval. This level of communication, which requires intention and > presence, is rare in our society, and can bring enrichment to social > relationships. It also offers valuable support for people who may be > experiencing social pressures, unemployed, or stuck in a boring job which > gives no satisfaction, feel hopeless or a failure, often signed off as sick > with depression, leading to guilt and shame, or cut off, isolated, at home > on their own, seeing everyone else portrayed in the media as leading > successful lives. Being able to link these emotions with some understanding > of how this capitalist system affects people's lives, what is happening > economically, or politically, can enable people to realise they are not > alone, that we share a common struggle. Sometimes through this deep > listening, we tune in to something universal, some might call it collective > consciousness, and our hearts feel nourished and refreshed. > > My intention is to provide this facility free online on Skype, Fuze, or > similar. I initiate the group but I am an equal participant, and share > responsibility with the other participants. I am happy to provide more > details. > > This may be different from the sort of courses you are offering. I would > welcome more discussion around the importance of including this in a full > education. > > Anna > > > > > > On 10 Jan 2015, at 19:58, Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Things are getting more concrete in terms of the workers owned cooperative > education design I have been working on. Will briefly introduce the below > also to faricoop, and faircoop members. in order to both ask contributing > design and content, but also and in case if they like to registering any > courses, or what would they need to learn for in exchange faircoins or what > ever they have to offer. Bob Haugen just kindly asked if the app they could > help -app wise- in coordination of needs and offers, can be bartered, and I > replied him below: > > "The thick lines are as below, may help to visualize for you and Lynn: > > We.. > > - offer several practice/skill sharing/exchange courses and several theory > courses, of which were complete modules, as well as fixed tutors. > - then like February will open registrations for the courses, that would > start May first. Those courses with enough registration like 15-20 will be > destined to take off. > - when we talk to comrades potential tutors, and ask them suggest courses, > we want to show them what we have in faircoop framework they could get in > exchange. For instance I have free text-document digitalization service to > offer, as well as they could chose to attend other free courses they might > like, like coding. > > Please Let me know in case you like to do something on coding, that would be > great. Or any topic you might wish to. It does not have to be course series, > can also be work shop, skill or ideas sharing, anything self-organised!" > > Just wanted to say that I believe this barter aspect, coordinated with an > help of app like Bob and Lynn have been developing can just be immediately > implemented between all of us. And would be complementary to inner- and > inter-cooperative economy using good cyrpto-currencies, like faircoin, or > free sharing! > > Ps. above is very much valid for all p2p and commons friends on this list > as well. So please think what would you need to learn, and what would you > like to teach, and let us know about it. > > Best, Orsan > > > _______________________________________________ > NetworkedLabour mailing list > NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org > http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour > _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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

Join us in helping to save seed sharing in the U.S.
by P2P Foundation mailing list 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

Dear colleagues, The Sustainable Economies Law Center and Shareable just launched a campaign to save seed sharing in the US. A summary of this urgent issue and the link to the petition is here: http://www.shareable.net/blog/selc-and-shareable-kickoff-campaign-to-save-s… We invite you to sign the petition and share this story. Thank you, Neal ps. click here <https://twitter.com/Shareable/status/555103584946491392> to share the campaign on Twitter. And click here <https://www.facebook.com/Shareable/posts/10152523126691408> to share it on Facebook. -- Neal Gorenflo, co-founder Shareable <http://www.shareable.net/> | @Shareable <https://twitter.com/@shareable> | 415.867.0429 Get Shareable's weekly e-news about sharing here <http://www.shareable.net/signup-for-shareables-weekly-sharing-economy-e-new…> .

1 0

Fwd: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: [WSF-Discuss] On the bias: 'social innovation' discourse is skewed to maintaining the status quo
by Michel Bauwens 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

hi Kevin can you post or excerpt from this on our blog, a very good editorial and critique of social innovation, Michel ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Brian K. Murphy <brian(a)radicalroad.com> Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 11:50 PM Subject: [WSF-Discuss] On the bias: 'social innovation' discourse is skewed to maintaining the status quo To: worldsocialforum-discuss(a)openspaceforum.net *https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/remko-berkhout/irresist <https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/remko-berkhout/irresist>ibly-biased-blind-spots-of-social-innovation* REMKO BERKHOUT 29 December 2014 *Irresistibly biased? The blind spots of social innovation* *Social innovation has an irresistible global appeal, but is it biased towards protecting the status quo? * What's the state of play in the fast paced world of* social innovation?* The Unusual Suspects Festival in London seemed a good place to find out. Collaboration was the theme. The claims made were high. The stakes may be even higher. A dazzling line up of initiatives were on display, backed up by discussions and debates on everything from the future of public services to the role of the arts in social change to the game-changing potential of social entrepreneurs. Social innovation has an irresistible global appeal. Who wouldn't be persuaded by the challenge of mobilizing all our skills, energies and creativity to solve the world's toughest problems? Students are increasingly pursuing social innovation as a career path. The UK government is championing it as a key strategy in the '*Big Society*.' Initiatives like Shared Lives Plus in healthcare, Code Club in education, and the return of community organizing at Locality were among hundreds of exciting examples showcased at the Festival. Thanks to the work of the Social Innovation Exchange, the impact of such projects travels to places as far apart as South Korea and Argentina, where innovators are working on similar grand challenges. Innovation is also fast becoming the mainstream in the international development community, with leading donor agencies like Britain's* Department for International Development*,* USAID* and the* Omidyar Network* throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at innovations linked to* poverty*,* humanitarian disasters* and* government transparency*. But perhaps this buzz disguises some important biases that undermine the power of social innovation, at least if it aims to transform the systems and structures that perpetuate poverty and inequality. I came away from the Festival with four of these biases swirling around my brain: a bias towards co-optation instead of genuine collaboration; 'bigger is always better;' 'solving problems' is more urgent than building the capacity to find solutions; and a serial avoidance of politics. According to management guru* Peter Senge*, collaboration is the* human face of systems change.* Addressing the most pressing global challenges demands collective action on an unprecedented scale across all sectors of life. We need more 'public-private partnerships' and 'multi-stakeholder initiatives.' But let's not forget that systemic change is impossible without contestation. Challenging dominant ideas and debating alternatives in the public sphere is a key source of creative tension. "Having a good fight before getting to yes" is essential to building compromises and constituencies, as the sociologist* Xavier de Souza Briggs* concludes in his book 'Democracy as Problem Solving." Protecting spaces for 'unruly politics' and the exercise of strong countervailing power is vital for societal renewal. So it's highly problematic to hear* Brooks Newmark*, Britain's "Minister for Civil Society," say that social organizations should* "stick to their knitting and keep out of politics"* at a meeting that announced the dawn of a "*people-helping-people age."* Just get on with your work, pay your taxes (so that government can bail out more banks), and don't expect the state to bail out ordinary people. Instead, here's some money and the odd award for you to 'innovate' your way to helping people deal with a collapsing economy and a social safety net that's disappearing. And so the social innovation community gets busy devising ingenious volunteering schemes in hospitals and facilitating communities to re-organize their depleted assets. Is this collaboration or co-optation? The second bias is scale. "You are playing too small," declared the writer* Charles Leadbeater* to a roomful of social innovators at a discussion of 'Making It Big,' a report issued by the UK agency* NESTA*. The report proposes some helpful steps to scale up social innovations, but omits to acknowledge that bigger is not always better. On the contrary, the desire to 'make things big' is what has caused many of our toughest problems to emerge or expand in the first place. If there's one thing to learn from systems thinking, it's that the smallest of gestures can make the biggest difference and vice versa. The problem with the scaling-up debate is that it's dominated by management science and its focus on market development and organizational theory. Developments in the social realm rarely conform to such dynamics. Nor do they fit into to the timeframes and 'value for money' metrics of success that funders and policymakers tend to apply. For example, studies of social movements show that their real impact lies through changing the climate of ideas or expanding the range of policy alternatives. The timeframes of these processes are generational, not annual, and their effects are usually difficult to control or predict. As an illustration, take the Austrian town of* Graz* where I live. In Graz I've discovered a lively ecosystem of activists and social entrepreneurs who are 'moving and shaking' public life through everything from* co-working schemes* to* projects for urban renewal* and* alternative street festivals*. A good many of them went to same alternative secondary school which was set up in the 1970s by parents who wanted to change the system through concrete* 'pre-figurative' alternatives.* By the social innovation standards of today, they failed. The school is still small and struggling, and the education system they set out to shake up is as stuck in its ways as it was 40 years ago. Yet haphazardly perhaps, it has produced a generation of change makers that are now at the forefront of creating innovations, big and small, across many areas of social and economic life. What these activists also have in common is that they don't worry excessively about problem solving, a third social innovation bias that plays out unproductively in at least two ways. First there's the myth of " solutionism", a term coined by* Evgeny Morozov* to describe the global obsession with 'fixing our world,' preferably with technological solutions or band aids while ignoring the deeper dynamics of the problem. Second, problem solving only taps into a small part of the reservoirs of human creativity and civic energy. To paraphrase the futurist* Buckminster Fuller*, people should be architects of their future, not slaves. The upshot of these biases is an over-arching denial of politics and power. My impression from the Unusual Suspects Festival was that little deep digging is happening in the social innovation world to get at the underlying factors that perpetuate inequality and plunder the planet. Popular tunes among innovators include grand statements about 'broken systems' and 'unprecedented crises' which demand that we 'hack' or 'reboot' our world. And then off we go, co-creating and experimenting our way to a bright emergent future. Coupled with energy, urgency is a contagious mix, but perhaps it would be useful to take an extra minute and ask some basic questions about what is going on: who benefits from the status quo, and who will benefit from any social innovation? Which problems rise to the top and which are ignored in competitions, policy papers and social innovation funding? To illustrate these questions, take the example of Alberta's one billion dollar Social Innovation Endowment, which was also featured at the Unusual Suspects Festival. According to its* own press release*, this new* "monster fund"* puts Alberta's "growing savings" to work in "resolving complex social issues like poverty or family violenceŠ[by using] new thinking, new approaches, and risk-taking that can be more effectively implemented outside of traditional government approaches." Big money, big words, but if these ambitions are genuine then a substantial part of the endowment should be invested in the deeper structures that give life and oxygen to society, like an education system that promotes life-long learning, or deepening democracy, strengthening gender equality and protecting biodiversity. In addition, where do these 'growing savings' come from? The answer is royalties from one of the* dirtiest forms of energy* in the world. You would expect at least a mention of the controversial* Alberta Tar Sands* and* the Keystone Pipeline* in the Endowment's strategy-probably the most important reality that frames the questions of who gains and who loses from social innovation in the province. It's none too soon for the social innovation community to throw away their rose tinted glasses. As for the next festival of unusual suspects in London or wherever, how about a focus on politics for a change? Now that really would be a social innovation. ********** *Remko Berkhout works as a consultant and facilitator with civic organizations on strategy, learning and innovation. He is exploring the fertile middle ground between social innovation and international development to identify new strategies for systemic change. * _______________________________________________ ** WSFDiscuss is an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of information and views on the experience, practise, and theory of the World Social Forum at any level (local, national, regional, and global) and on related social and political movements and issues. Join in !** _______________________________________________ WSFDiscuss mailing list POST to LIST : Send email to WorldSocialForum-Discuss(a)openspaceforum.net SUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe(a)openspaceforum.net UNSUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-unsubscribe(a)openspaceforum.net LIST ARCHIVES: http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum… LIST INFORMATION: http://openspaceforum.net/mailman/listinfo/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspa… _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: [WSF-Discuss] The Uber economy: taking advantage of wealth inequality
by Michel Bauwens 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: peter waterman <peterwaterman1936(a)gmail.com> 1. From: Brian K. Murphy <brian(a)radicalroad.com> Date: Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:47 PM Subject: [WSF-Discuss] The Uber economy: taking advantage of wealth inequality To: worldsocialforum-discuss(a)openspaceforum.net http://qz.com/312537/the-secret-to-the-uber-economy-is-wealth-inequality/ *UBER + PIKETTY = 2014* *The secret to the Uber economy is wealth inequality* *There's no Uber for this.* by Leo Mirani, New American Economy, December 16, 2014* | Quartz* Of the many attractions offered by my hometown, a west coast peninsula famed for its deep natural harbor, perhaps the most striking is that you never have to leave the house. With nothing more technologically advanced than a phone, you can arrange to have delivered to your doorstep, often in less than an hour, takeaway food, your weekly groceries, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs (over-the-counter, prescription, proscribed), books, newspapers, a dozen eggs, half a dozen eggs, a single egg. I once had a single bottle of Coke sent to my home at the same price I would have paid had I gone to shop myself. The same goes for services. When I lived there, a man came around every morning to collect my clothes and bring them back crisply ironed the next day; he would have washed them, too, but I had a washing machine. These luxuries are not new. I took advantage of them long before Uber became a verb, before the world saw the first iPhone in 2007, even before the first submarine fibre-optic cable landed on our shores in 1997. In my hometown of Mumbai, we have had many of these conveniences for at least as long as we have had landlines-and some even earlier than that. It did not take technology to spur the on-demand economy. It took masses of poor people. *Silicon Valley catches on* In San Francisco, another peninsular city on another west coast on the other side of the world, a similar revolution of convenience is underway, spurred by the unstoppable rise of Uber, the on-demand taxi service, which went from offering services in 60 cities around the world at the end of last year to more than 200 today. Uber's success has sparked a revolution, covered in great detail this summer by Re/code, a tech blog, which ran a special series about "the new instant gratification economy." As Re/code pointed out, after Uber showed how it's done, nearly every pitch made by starry-eyed technologists "in Silicon Valley seemed to morph overnight into an 'Uber for X' startup." Various companies are described now as "Uber for massages," "Uber for alcohol," and "Uber for laundry and dry cleaning," among many, many other things ("Uber for city permits"). So profound has been their cultural influence in 2014, one man wrote a poem about them for Quartz. (Nobody has yet written a poem dedicated to the other big cultural touchstone of 2014 for the business and economics crowd, French economist Thomas Piketty's smash hit, Capital in the Twenty-First Century.) The conventional narrative is this: enabled by smartphones, with their GPS chips and internet connections, enterprising young businesses are using technology to connect a vast market willing to pay for convenience with small businesses or people seeking flexible work. This narrative ignores another vital ingredient, without which this new economy would fall apart: inequality. *The new middlemen* There are only two requirements for an on-demand service economy to work, and neither is an iPhone. First, the market being addressed needs to be big enough to scale-food, laundry, taxi rides. Without that, it's just a concierge service for the rich rather than a disruptive paradigm shift, as a venture capitalist might say. Second, and perhaps more importantly, there needs to be a large enough labor class willing to work at wages that customers consider affordable and that the middlemen consider worthwhile for their profit margins. Uber was founded in 2009, in the immediate aftermath of the worst financial crisis in a generation. As the ride-sharing app has risen, so too have income disparity and wealth inequality in the United States as a whole and in San Francisco in particular. Recent research by the Brookings Institution found that of any US city, San Francisco had the largest increase in inequality between 2007 and 2012. The disparity in San Francisco as of 2012, as measured (pdf) by a city agency, was in fact more pronounced than inequality in Mumbai (pdf). Of course, there are huge differences between the two cities. Mumbai is a significantly poorer, dirtier, more miserable place to live and work. Half of its citizens lack access to sanitation or formal housing. Another distinction, just as telling, lies in the opportunities the local economy affords to the army of on-demand delivery people it supports. In Mumbai, the man who delivers a bottle of rum to my doorstep can learn the ins and outs of the booze business from spending his days in a liquor store. If he scrapes together enough capital, he may one day be able to open his own shop and hire his own delivery boys. His counterpart in San Francisco has no such access. The person who cleans your home in SoMa has little interaction with the mysterious forces behind the app that sends him or her to your door. The Uber driver who wants an audience with management can't go to Uber headquarters; he or she must visit a separate "driver center." There is no denying the seductive nature of convenience-or the cold logic of businesses that create new jobs, whatever quality they may be. But the notion that brilliant young programmers are forging a newfangled "instant gratification" economy is a falsehood. Instead, it is a rerun of the oldest sort of business: middlemen insinuating themselves between buyers and sellers. All that modern technology has done is make it easier, through omnipresent smartphones, to amass a fleet of increasingly desperate jobseekers eager to take whatever work they can get. _______________________________________________ ** WSFDiscuss is an open and unmoderated forum for the exchange of information and views on the experience, practise, and theory of the World Social Forum at any level (local, national, regional, and global) and on related social and political movements and issues. Join in !** _______________________________________________ WSFDiscuss mailing list POST to LIST : Send email to WorldSocialForum-Discuss(a)openspaceforum.net SUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe(a)openspaceforum.net UNSUBSCRIBE: Send empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-unsubscribe(a)openspaceforum.net LIST ARCHIVES: http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum… LIST INFORMATION: http://openspaceforum.net/mailman/listinfo/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspa… _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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: CESR Seminar (16-01-15): Does community organising present trade unions a way of rebuilding the union movement?
by Örsan Şenalp 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

My answer is yes, definitely! This is just a very draft test page for registrations and launch of co-workers' global open and cooperative self-e-learning facility, desiged to be embedded in existing and much broader open and cooperative co-worker's economy. The idea is to build this as an exit points for labour in capital, linking it to says-us, fair.coop as well as other initiatives. http://orsansenalp.wix.com/gnuniversity yesterday Tiberious from Sensorica, Roland from De*growth related project suggested to do a course. Richard Barbrook has also send two materials on politics of media. The date of the launch and opening event is set yet schedule of intro courses as well as sponsors are imaginery. Hoping that it would give better view of. Please get in touch if you like to involve in preperation and development of the project. Best, Orsan Begin forwarded message: *From:* Sian Moore <Sian2.Moore(a)UWE.AC.UK> *Date:* 13 januari 2015 12:57:23 CET *To:* CRITICAL-LABOUR-STUDIES(a)JISCMAIL.AC.UK *Subject:* *FW: CESR Seminar (16-01-15): Does community organising present trade unions a way of rebuilding the union movement?* *Reply-To:* Sian Moore <Sian2.Moore(a)UWE.AC.UK> The next CESR seminar <http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/bbs/research/cesr/cesrseminars.aspx> will be held on Friday, January 16 2015, with a presentation by: [image: http://www.uwe.ac.uk/enews/structure_img/spacer.gif] Jane Holgate <http://business.leeds.ac.uk/about-us/faculty-staff/member/profile/jane-holg…> Professor of Work and Employment Relations, Leeds University Business School [image: http://www.uwe.ac.uk/enews/structure_img/spacer.gif] Does community organising present trade unions a way of rebuilding the union movement?

1 0

Fwd: [Networkedlabour] The 'Internet of Things' Will Be The World's Most Massive Device Market And Save Companies Billions Of Dollars
by Michel Bauwens 12 Jan '15

12 Jan '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan Senalp <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 1:47 PM Subject: [Networkedlabour] The 'Internet of Things' Will Be The World's Most Massive Device Market And Save Companies Billions Of Dollars To: "networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org" <networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org > http://flip.it/MVLxe Also including wishful thinking - marketing elements, sounds like business bluffs into a IoT bubble: "Here are a few of the key findings from the BI Intelligence report: - *The Internet of Things will be the largest device market in the world <https://intelligence.businessinsider.com/the-internet-of-things-is-rising-e…>.* We estimate that by 2019 it will be more than double the size of the smartphone, PC, tablet, connected car, and the wearable market *combined. * - *The IoT will result in $1.7 trillion in value added to the global economy in 2019 <https://intelligence.businessinsider.com/the-internet-of-things-is-rising-e…>. *This includes hardware, software, installation costs, management services, and economic value added from realized IoT efficiencies. - *Device shipments will reach 6.7 billion in 2019 for a five-year CAGR of 61% <https://intelligence.businessinsider.com/the-internet-of-things-is-rising-e…>. *Revenue from hardware sales will be only $50 billion or 8% of the total revenue from IoT-specific efforts, as software makers and infrastructure companies will earn the lion's share. - *The enterprise sector will lead the IoT, accounting for 46% of device shipments this year <https://intelligence.businessinsider.com/the-internet-of-things-is-rising-e…>, *but that share will decline as the government and home sectors gain momentum. By 2019, government will be the leading sector for IoT device shipments. - *The main benefit of growth in the IoT will be increased efficiency and lower costs <https://intelligence.businessinsider.com/the-internet-of-things-is-rising-e…>.*The IoT promises increased efficiency within the home, city, and workplace by giving control to the user. However, many are hesitant to use devices as security problems are still an issue...." _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: <nettime> Lost Dreams of the American Future
by Michel Bauwens 12 Jan '15

12 Jan '15

Thankfully, fifty years after the opening of the 1964/5 New York's World Fair, the USA's elite is no longer the exclusive owner of the hi-tech future. The empire's networked computers have become the tools of its rebellious subjects' collective emancipation. As the heroic Vietnamese partisans so emphatically proved four decades ago when they successfully breached the McNamara Line, the NSA's totalitarian technologies may be able to slow down historical progress, but these spooks can't reverse its direction. Empowered by the Net, the peoples of this planet are engaged in collaboratively building a truly human civilisation. The virtual future is here and now. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:23 PM Subject: [Networkedlabour] Fwd: <nettime> Lost Dreams of the American Future To: "<networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org>" < networkedlabour(a)lists.contrast.org> Forwarding a recent and stunning piece by Richard Barbrook. It was confronting to me, in line with Christian Siefkes' point about the social change triggering the scientific innovations and developments of productive forces, to read in the text how the social, technical, political, economic and cultural big changes and un-changes are actually dialectically intertwine as they did in last 40-50 years so intense. Also Putting in perspective the bigger probability of non-discovery of Augmented Intelligence, Theory of Everything, so no doorway opening to Singularity, yet most probability coming of more and more advanced off-springs of technological developments from the top, that are driven by control and command, accumulate and centralize objectives, which might be promoted in hygienic and appealing smart cities and Internet of things(es). Orsan *Resent-From:* nettime(a)kein.org *From:* Richard Barbrook <richard(a)imaginaryfutures.net> *Date:* 11 januari 2015 20:51:57 CET *Resent-To:* Nettime <nettime-l(a)kein.org> *To:* nettime-l(a)kein.org *Subject:* *<nettime> Lost Dreams of the American Future* English: http://www.cybersalon.org/lost-dreams-of-the-american-future German: http://www.zeit.de/2015/01/weltausstellung-new-york-internet Welcome to what was once the greatest show on earth! This year marks the 50th anniversary of the first season of the 1964/5 New York World's Fair. I know because I was there as a 7-year-old boy and I can still recall my excitement at seeing the giant rockets in its Space Park. Having just arrived from England, the Barbrook family's day out at the World's Fair was one of my earliest encounters with the weird and wonderful culture of what would be my temporary home for the next 12 months. My father Alec was on his way to begin a research sabbatical at MIT's Political Science department which - as I later discovered to my amusement - was surreptitiously funded by the CIA. Since these spooks' goal was to persuade Europeans to embrace the American cause, spending some of their grant money on our family excursion to the 1964/5 New York World's Fair was most appropriate. Symbolising its organisers' ambitions, the centre piece of this exposition was a 43 metre stainless steel sculpture of planet earth: the Unisphere. Laid out around this impressive icon was a complex of pavilions sponsored by US government institutions, private corporations, friendly countries and faith communities. Wandering around these exhibits, the Barbrook family and other visitors to the World's Fair could - among its many spectacular attractions - watch a musical about the marvels of chemistry, take a Disney ride explaining the evolution of life on earth, lunch in an imitation Belgian village, go on a Pop Art ferris wheel, gaze at a domed roof shaped like the moon and stand underneath 9 life-size replicas of dinosaurs. The best of everything from all corners of the globe was on display for us to savour. Above all, the crowds at this exposition were expected to admire the unsurpassed technological prowess of the American empire. In both its state and corporate pavilions, what had already been achieved was proudly displayed as the promise of the shape of things to come. The Mercury and Gemini rockets which so impressed me as a small boy were precursors of the space liners which would one day be taking holiday-makers to the moon. General Electric showcased a demonstration of atomic fusion which would soon be providing almost free energy for every business and household. Launching its new System/360 mainframe, IBM boasted that this computer was the prototype of machines that would be able to reason like human beings: artificial intelligence. The patriotic message of these fabulous exhibits was unambiguous. The USA was the hi-tech future of humanity in the present. Inspired by this utopian prophecy, the peoples of the world were now adopting the American way of life with enthusiasm. Within a couple of decades at most, we would all be able to travel into space, use electricity without worrying about its cost and buy robot slaves to serve our every need. Science fiction was on the verge of becoming everyday reality. Ever since the stunning success of Victorian Britain's 1851 Great Exhibition, ambitious elites have been hosting international expositions to promote their own country's scientific advances, cultural accomplishments, geopolitical influence and economic achievements. For instance, like Beijing Olympics two years earlier, the recent Expo 2010 in Shanghai was conceived as a public celebration of China's reemergence as a great power. East Asia was once again at the centre of the global system. Five decades earlier, when the 1964/5 New York World's Fair opened, its organisers were similarly confident about the USA's exceptional status. In the year that the Barbrook family visited this show, there could be no doubt that America was Number 1 in every key indicator of national importance: political freedom, living standards, financial hegemony, industrial output, artistic creativity, military might and, as its corporate and state pavilions kept emphasising, technological progress. Crucially, on all of these measures, its Russian rival was a poor second in the Cold War confrontation between East and West. Not surprisingly, like so many Europeans of his generation, my father took pride in his enthusiasm for the American empire. Being awarded a grant to study at MIT merely confirmed his long-held loyalty to the most advanced civilisation in human history. In 1964, as our family visit to the New York World's Fair confirmed, the West was the best. Nowhere better conveyed this geopolitical message than the exposition's Mercury and Gemini rockets. Like most small boys at that time, I was obsessed with the heroic adventures of the astronauts and cosmonauts who were competing against each other in the space race between the USA and the USSR. I too fantasised about flying to the stars with John Glenn - and embracing Valentina Tereshkova in zero gravity! As my mother fondly recalls, my top priority for our family visit to the World's Fair was going to the Space Park. Although the Russians had taken an early lead, its Mercury and Gemini rockets proved that the Americans were now surging ahead in this superpower contest for technological supremacy. Before the decade was over, the USA would win the space race when its astronauts made the first landing on the moon. Yet, despite this impressive triumph, the predictions of interplanetary tourism made at the 1964/5 World's Fair have yet to be fulfilled. If the 7-year-old Richard had been able to look forward to now, the fact that it's impossible buy a ticket to the moon in 2014 would have been most puzzling. Unfortunately, like almost everyone else at the exposition, I'd been misled about the true purpose of the huge rockets in the Space Park. Far from being Version 1.0 of starships, they'd been developed for a much more diabolical purpose: the mass murder of millions of civilians. Guided by computers, these missiles were capable of delivering a nuclear bomb which could wipe out an entire Russian city and its unfortunate inhabitants. Not surprisingly, the management of the World's Fair had no wish to terrify its visitors with the imminent threat of atomic armageddon, especially as the Cold War enemy was also equipped with these horrific weapons. Instead, concealing their military origins, intercontinental missiles, nuclear reactors and mainframe computers were rebranded as the precursors of space tourism, free energy and thinking machines. Except for the perceptive few, the happy crowds enjoying the Pop Art architecture, Broadway shows and Disney rides of the New York World's Fair were unaware that all around them on public display were the mechanisms of genocide. In the West as in the East, optimistic propaganda had replaced critical understanding. Five decades later, the Cold War prophecies of extraterrestrial tourism and fusion power are still being plugged by the promoters of Virgin Galactic's space planes and the EU's experimental HiPER reactor. For them, the techno-utopian future is what it used to be. More surprisingly, there are even some scientists who also believe in the imminent arrival of artificial intelligence. Yet, the history of computing since the 1964/5 New York World's Fair has taken a very different path from that predicted by its IBM pavilion. Instead of enabling expensive room-sized machines to mimic human brains, continual improvements in hardware and software during this intervening period have shrunk the expensive System/360 mainframe into today's affordable laptops, mobiles and tablets. Above all, over the past fifty years, computing has converged with telecommunications and the media to create the iconic technology of our own times: the Net. At the New York World's Fair, IBM's computer which could read hand-writing, Bell's prototype videophones and the model of the Telstar satellite circling the Unisphere were premonitions of this ubiquitous necessity of modern living. Capturing the emancipatory possibilities of these scientific advances, its organisers declared that their exposition was dedicated to construction of global harmony: 'Peace through Understanding'. Unfortunately, just like the Mercury and Gemini rockets in the Space Park, network computing is also a Cold War technology which was invented for malign purposes. In America as in Russia, it was military money that funded the pioneering scientific research into digital hardware and software. During the two decades before the 1964/5 New York World's Fair, IBM's success in securing defence contracts had transformed the corporation into the dominant player within this cutting-edge sector of the economy. Every machine from its first commercially available mainframe series - the aptly-named 701 Defense Calculator - was sold to either the US military or weapons manufacturers. IBM developed both the graphic user interface and remote computer terminals for the SAGE command-and-control system of the American bomber fleet. Crucially, it was while working at the US airforce's RAND think-tank that Paul Baran published his seminal 1960 paper on packet-switching data networks. One carefully-aimed Russian atomic bomb could disable America's imperial power by destroying the central node of its military's top-down hierarchy. In his RAND report, Baran argued that IBM's SAGE provided the prototype of a digital solution to this mortal danger. By enabling the flow of orders to route around any damaged links within computerised communications, his packet-switching software would ensure that the USA's armed forces could keep on fighting against the Russian opposition even if its General Staff headquarters was knocked out of action. In this first iteration, the Net was a command-and-control system for waging nuclear warfare. While the crowds were still flocking to admire the technological marvels of the New York World's Fair, America's political and military leaders were seduced by their own futurist propaganda into making one of the most disastrous decisions in this nation's history: the invasion of Vietnam. Back in the mid-1950s, when the French empire was evicted from its South-East Asia colony by a Maoist peasant insurgency, the USA had intervened to secure the southern half of the country for its local supporters. But, by the time that the World's Fair opened a decade later, this corrupt and brutal pro-American client state was in deep trouble. With organisational and logistical help from the independent north, Maoist guerrillas had taken over most of the countryside in the south and were on verge of seizing control of its major cities. Refusing to concede defeat in this Cold War confrontation, the rulers of the American empire in 1965 decided to send out a massive expeditionary force to subdue this rebellious frontier province. In contrast with the defeated French colonialists, the US military now possessed advanced digital technologies which could secure victory on the South-East Asian battlefield. Using IBM System/360 mainframes, its staff officers planned the bombing campaigns and 'search-and-destroy' missions that were launched against the Vietnamese partisans. By measuring the losses of American troops and their local collaborators against those of the resistance fighters and their civilian supporters with accountancy software, US generals had statistical proof that the West was winning its war against the East: the 'body count'. Named in honour of the politician who managed this colonial campaign, the McNamara Line was built as an impenetrable electronic barrier between the two halves of Vietnam. When its vast array of networked sensors detected reinforcements from the liberated north crossing into the occupied south, they alerted the computers monitoring this Asian equivalent of the Berlin Wall which then directed American aircraft and helicopter-born troops to intercept and eliminate these Maoist subversives. In this second iteration, the Net was a top-down surveillance technology for imposing the empire's domination over the restless natives of its border regions. As they toured the marvellous exhibits of the New York World's Fair, the overwhelming majority of visitors didn't realise that its corporate sponsors were already making huge profits by providing the machinery of death and destruction for the US military's assault on Vietnam. Inside the IBM, Bell and General Electric pavilions, the hi-tech promise of global peace was hiding the barbaric reality of imperialist butchery. Fortunately for humanity, over the next decade, the bravery and ingenuity of the Vietnamese partisans slowly but surely overcame the massive superiority in material and manpower of the American army of occupation. In the end, like the Berlin Wall, the McNamara Line couldn't prevent the unification of a country whose people were determined to be united. Yet, as the recent revelations by Wikileaks and Edward Snowden have reminded everyone, the 1975 victory of the Vietnamese national liberation struggle only intensified the US military's enthusiasm for network computerised warfare. Next time, its upgraded hardware and software must be able to beat the bad guys. By the time that Bush administration decided to invade Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001, American generals were convinced that their soldiers were now invincible on the electronic battlefield. Hi-tech weaponry was their substitute for intelligent geopolitics. But, having failed to learn the lessons of Vietnam, the US elite has once again suffered humiliation in these 21st century imperialist adventures. As the foot soldiers are slowly withdrawn from the badlands of the Middle East and Central Asia, the National Security Agency (NSA) has now emerged from the shadows to take a frontline role in the defence of the American empire. By intercepting phone calls, emails and social media postings, its spies are already able to provide the terrain coordinates for many of the US military's deadly strikes against suspected Islamist terrorists. When the NSA has the whole of humanity under constant observation and American drones are continually patrolling the world's skies, all overt resistance to imperial domination will become suicidal. In this 21st century reboot of the McNamara Line, the global hegemon punishes evil thoughts with sudden death from above. Still traumatised by Al Qaeda's murderous 2001 attacks on New York and Washington DC, the overwhelming majority of the American population strongly supports their government's repressive measures against terrorists in distant countries who threaten the safety of mainland USA. Even Snowden's exposure of the NSA's phone tapping of leading European politicians has aroused little protest. When American lives are in danger, the human rights of foreigners are irrelevant. However, as the inhabitants of earlier empires also discovered to their cost, despotism abroad almost inevitably inspires authoritarianism at home. According to the 1791 Bill of Rights, every US citizen is protected from the worst abuses of state tyranny, including the interception of their personal communications except in exceptional circumstances which require judicial authorisation. Already much eroded during the Cold War, this constitutional guarantee was negated by the mass panic unleashed by Al Qaeda's 2001 terrorist atrocities. Having obtained the approval of both the legislature and the courts, the US government ordered the NSA to monitor the personal communications of anyone who might pose a threat to the American empire. Flush with taxpayers' money, its spooks have spent the last decade and a half constructing the technical infrastructure for the ubiquitous surveillance of the entire global population. More than anything else, the realisation of this totalitarian ambition has depended upon the dominance of corporate America over the Net. Whether for targeted advertising, market research or customer relations, these dotcom companies have become adept at gathering and analysing data about how people are using their products and services. For the spooks, gaining access to this confidential information which can reveal an individual's political opinions, moral beliefs and cultural tastes is a top priority. Like the corporate sponsors of the New York World's Fair that profited from the American invasion of Vietnam, some dotcom companies such as Microsoft have voluntarily included back doors in software to facilitate NSA spying upon the purchasers of their products. Others with more scruples like Google have instead had the traffic to their servers surreptitiously copied by the American secret police. Crucially, this mission to accumulate intimate digital data is no longer confined to the brown-skinned inhabitants of the troubled frontiers of the imperial realm. With the 1791 Bill of Rights eviscerated, the NSA can now also intercept the personal communications of all-white American citizens with impunity. Since anyone could be an enemy of the empire, everybody must be a potential target of surveillance. Invented as a military technology, the Net promises to provide the US elite with a decisive technological advantage in the perpetual war against its real and imagined opponents at home and abroad: total information awareness. The organised few will always prevail over the disorganised multitude. On both sides of the Atlantic, much of the anger directed at the NSA's illegal spying is fuelled by the shocked realisation that the libertarian prophecies of the Net boosters have been disappointed. Back in the mid-1990s, the writers of 'Wired' promised that the convergence of computing, telecommunications and the media would soon sweep away the state and corporate hierarchies which curtailed personal creativity, individual freedom and entrepreneurial initiative. In their Californian vision of the digital future, anyone with a good idea and a bit of luck has the opportunity to become a dotcom millionaire. Echoing this neoliberal prediction, many leftists over the past two decades have also embraced the emancipatory possibilities of the information society. Bypassing the ideological conformity of the mainstream media, radicals can now utilise social media to proselytise and organise against the exploiters of humanity and the plunderers of the planet. As proved by the 2010-1 Arab Spring and the 2011-2 Occupy movements, the Net is creating the technological infrastructure for mass participation in democratic decision-making. Unfortunately, like the crowds at the 1964/5 New York World's Fair, the believers in these two variants of digital libertarianism have been mesmerised by the wonderful civilian spin-offs of a dubious military project. As Snowden's leaks remind us, the Net wasn't invented to open up new markets or foster political diversity. Like the rockets which so impressed the 7-year-old Richard in the Space Park, it is first and foremost a Cold War weapons system. Far from perverting its true purpose, the NSA's grandiose scheme of ubiquitous global surveillance is the fulfilment of the Net's founding mission: defending American imperial hegemony over a chaotic world. According to some clever hackers and resourceful entrepreneurs, the menace of digital totalitarianism can be countered by developing strong forms of encryption for the masses. However, as the recent arrests of the sellers of recreational drugs on Silk Road 2 demonstrated, this technological fix is unlikely to provide a long-term solution for protecting personal privacy. This growing realisation of the inherent weaknesses in Tor and other encryption programs has encouraged the rediscovery of more traditional countermeasures to state tyranny. Tim Berners-Lee - the revered creator of the first web browser - is now calling for the formulation of a new Bill of Rights for the Net. Even if the NSA could be made to respect the US constitution, Americans would carry on spontaneously flouting its legal protections of their own privacy. Thanks to the Net, sharing personal information with strangers is now a prerequisite of everyday existence. From finding directions on a map to buying next week's groceries, people are continually revealing the most intimate details of their personal lives to all and sundry. As Berners-Lee has understood, the liberal concept of the self-sufficient individual which inspired the 1791 US Bill of Rights is now obsolete. What is required instead is a new political settlement which nurtures today's collective forms of digital citizenship. Personal freedom on the Net is threatened by the intrusive attentions of both state and corporate hierarchies. If the emancipatory promise of the information society is to be fulfilled, people must be confident that their informed consent is required to access and utilise their private data. The fear of secret police surveillance and corporate monitoring is already inhibiting the expression of dissident views on social media. By ensuring that freedom and democracy aren't sacrificed for security and profits, the Net Bill of Rights can provide the mutually agreed rules for regulating the 21st century's network society in the common interest. In cyberspace as in real life, politics is always better organised bottom-up than top-down. Thankfully, fifty years after the opening of the 1964/5 New York's World Fair, the USA's elite is no longer the exclusive owner of the hi-tech future. The empire's networked computers have become the tools of its rebellious subjects' collective emancipation. As the heroic Vietnamese partisans so emphatically proved four decades ago when they successfully breached the McNamara Line, the NSA's totalitarian technologies may be able to slow down historical progress, but these spooks can't reverse its direction. Empowered by the Net, the peoples of this planet are engaged in collaboratively building a truly human civilisation. The virtual future is here and now. ========================= Richard Barbrook is Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Westminster in London, England. He is the author of 'Class Wargames: ludic subversion against spectacular capitalism'; 'Imaginary Futures: from thinking machines to the global village'; 'The Class of the New'; and 'Media Freedom: the contradictions of communications in the age of modernity'. For more information, check out his websites: http://www.imaginaryfutures.net http://classwargames.net # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime(a)kein.org _______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list NetworkedLabour(a)lists.contrast.org http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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: Solidarity networking with Greece, and for the commons
by Michel Bauwens 12 Jan '15

12 Jan '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Orsan <orsan1234(a)gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 5:15 PM Subject: Solidarity networking with Greece, and for the commons http://www.altersummit.eu/accueil/article/support-to-the-greek-people Best "Support to the Greek people All the versions of this article: [English] [français <http://www.altersummit.eu/accueil/article/accueil/article/soutien-au-peuple…> ] The Crisis, Resistance, and Alternatives Europe is in a profound slump. Despite reassuring voices already predicting an end to the crisis, living and working conditions continue to deteriorate. Poverty and precarity are dramatically increasing across the continent. A social Europe is not on political decision-makers’ agenda. But social movements are not giving up. On the contrary, they are organising and getting bigger. Not enough to present a strong opposition to antisocial policies, but there are signs of encouragement on the horizon. Resistance is beginning to produce results, politically as well. New progressive forces have been born and are slowly occupying previously lost places. New proposals might bring about democratic change in Europe. The situation in Greece is particularly significant. Today, a party based on progressive ideas has hopes of leading the government in the coming months. In this context, Alter Summit demands : - that the Greek people be able to sovereignly decide their destiny without the interference of European institutions and national and international major media, and unthreatened by politicians or financial markets ; - that an elected government be able to choose policies that best respond to the needs of their people, especially when promising democratic advances. Moreover, Alter Summit will support any party or political movement in Greece or elsewhere in Europe whose stated task is to respond to the following issues that we have defined in our June 2013 Manifesto: - bringing an end to debt enslavement, meaning – among other things – the immediate cancellation of the memoranda imposed on over-indebted countries by the Troika and suspension of payment on the debt until these populations are protected from increasing poverty and unemployment; - ending austerity by refusing or annulling treaties and the settlements they impose and by assuring fiscal justice; - reversing the present tendency to eliminate rights, especially by restoring the freedom to negotiate and take collective action; - making banks and finance serve the well-being of the people. Citizens must have the power to decide. Europe must change direction. The entrance of new actors in the European political arena could alter the balance of power in favour of progressive aspirations. An international campaign in support of the Greek people is forming in Europe. Alter Summit will be involved and participate in its capacity. Alter Summit is coordinating labour organisations, NGO’s and social platforms from across Europe; the diversity of today’s social movements demands respect for the sovereign choices of the Greek people and supports them in their struggle for greater democracy. Through reflection, discussion and mobilisation, Alter Summit contributes to constructing a strong social movement in Europe to ensure political advances towards a Europe that is democratic, social, ecological and feminist! We want an end to austerity and we demand true democracy! Brussels, the 9th of January 2015" -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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: [INVITATION] transmediale 2015 CAPTURE ALL
by Michel Bauwens 12 Jan '15

12 Jan '15

dear Kevin, an p2p-ish art announcement for our blog, \ Michel ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: transmediale <info(a)transmediale.de> Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:37 PM Subject: [INVITATION] transmediale 2015 CAPTURE ALL To: michel(a)p2pfoundation.net transmediale 2015 CAPTURE ALL transmediale*/art&digitalculture* / English version, German version below <#14ade25ecac615b1_top_DE> *Invitation* [image: Update] <http://www.transmediale.de/festival> We warmly invite you to the next edition of transmediale, Berlin’s festival for art and digital culture, held from *28 January until 1 February 2015*. What do the futures of work, play and life look like through the black mirror of data? How will our quantified lives unfold? transmediale 2015 looks at how we make sense of a culture dependant on measurement and automation procedures, and how to act with autonomy within such a culture. We are living in societies and economies defined by a global competitive drive for constant, algorithm-guided optimisation. What are the underlying motivational structures that propel our hard work and play participation in the networks? transmediale 2015 presents artistic responses and speculative scenarios as well as critical thinking on processes of gamification, quantification, ubiquitous networking and algorithmic control and their ways of making the spheres of everyday life, work and play increasingly indistinguishable. We are proud to present a diverse international programme of exhibitions, screenings, conference events, workshops and performances with participants from many different disciplines. transmediale 2015 CAPTURE ALL will commence with an *opening ceremony <http://www.transmediale.de/content/opening-transmediale-2015-capture-all>* on* 28 January, 19:00 at Haus der Kulturen der Welt*. The ceremony includes speeches as well as interventions by artists participating in this year’s programme. The welcoming words by *Bernd Scherer (HKW)* will be followed by a thematic introduction to the festival programme by the artistic director of transmediale *Kristoffer Gansing*. As a guest speaker, we are pleased to announce the technology activist *Peter Sunde* (formerly The Pirate Bay). Further, the artists *Erica Scourti*,* Jennifer Lyn Morone*,* LaTurbo Avedon* and *Art Is Open Source [AOS]: Salvatore Iaconesi and Oriana Persico* will give performances, predictions and sale pitches that introduce key concepts of the festival. In addition, artist and writer *Hanne Lippard* will do a CAPTURE ALL reading. *Doors of the house already open at 17:30*, and tickets are not required for this day. After the ceremony, the installation *Sovereign Sisters <http://www.transmediale.de/content/sovereign-sisters>** by* *The Otolith Group* will be screened in the Auditorium. Together with the opening of the house, we will also open our main *CAPTURE ALL exhibition* <http://www.transmediale.de/festival/programme/exhibition1> and the guest exhibition *Time & Motion: Redefining Working Life* <http://www.transmediale.de/festival/programme/exhibition2>. The opening programme also includes the video installation *Hoax_Canular* <http://www.transmediale.de/content/hoaxcanular> by *Dominic Gagnon*, shown in the Theatersaal, activities and drinks in the foyer space and DJs at the Café Global stage. To get to know more about this and many other CAPTURE ALL events throughout the following festival days, please check our website <http://www.transmediale.de> for details. We are looking forward to welcoming you at the festival! Kristoffer Gansing, Artistic Director *=) ) ================ GERMAN VERSION ================ ) * / Deutsche Version *Einladung* [image: Update] <http://www.transmediale.de/festival> Wir möchten Sie herzlich zu der nächsten Ausgabe der transmediale einladen, Berlins Festival für Kunst und digitale Kultur, das vom *28. Januar bis 1. Februar 2015* stattfindet. Wie sieht die Zukunft von Arbeit, Spiel und Leben durch den „Black Mirror“ von Daten aus? Wie werden sich unsere quantifizierten Lebensstrukturen entwickeln? Die transmediale 2015 thematisiert unser Verständnis gegenüber einer Kultur, die von Messungs- und Automationsabläufen abhängt, und wie man in solch einer Kultur autonom handeln kann. Wir leben in Gesellschafts- und Wirtschaftsstrukturen, die von einem weltweiten Wetteifern nach konstanter, von Algorithmen geleiteter Optimierung definiert werden. Welche tieferliegenden Motivationsstrukturen treiben unsere harte Arbeit und unseren Spielanteil in Netzwerken an? Die transmediale 2015 zeigt künstlerische Reaktionen und spekulative Szenarios sowie kritische Überlegungen zu Prozessen der Gamifizierung, Quantifizierung, allgegenwärtigen Netzwerkens und algorithmischen Kontrolle. Auch soll Thema sein, wie diese Abläufe die Sphären des täglichen Lebens, der Arbeit und des Spiels zunehmend miteinander vermischen. Wir freuen uns, ein breites internationales Programm an Ausstellungen, Screenings, Konferenzveranstaltungen, Workshops und Performances mit Teilnehmern aus vielen unterschiedlichen Bereichen zu präsentieren. Die transmediale 2015 CAPTURE ALL beginnt mit einer *Eröffnungszeremonie <http://www.transmediale.de/de/content/opening-transmediale-2015-capture-all>* am* 28. Januar um 19:00 im Haus der Kulturen der Welt*. Neben offiziellen Eröffnungsreden gibt es hier auch Interventionen von Künstlern aus dem Festivalprogramm. Auf die Willkommensworte von *Bernd Scherer (HKW)* folgt eine thematische Einführung des künstlerischen Leiters der transmediale, *Kristoffer Gansing*. Als Gastredner freuen wir uns den Technologie-Aktivisten *Peter Sunde (früher The Pirate Bay)* ankündigen zu können. Außerdem gibt es Performances, Voraussagen und Verkaufspräsentationen von den Künstlern *Erica Scourti*, *Jennifer Lyn Morone*, *LaTurbo Avedon* and *Art Is Open Source [AOS]: Salvatore Iaconesi and Oriana Persico*, die in die Kernthemen des Festivals einführen. Zusätzlich gibt es eine CAPTURE ALL Lesung mit der Künstlerin und Autorin* Hanne Lippard*. * Das Haus wird schon um 17:30 geöffnet* und es müssen an diesem Tag keine Tickets für die Veranstaltungen gekauft werden. Nach der Zeremonie wird im Auditorium die Installation *Sovereign Sisters <http://www.transmediale.de/de/content/sovereign-sisters-0>* von *The Otolith Group* gezeigt werden. Zusammen mit der Öffnung des Hauses, eröffnen wir auch unsere *CAPTURE ALL Ausstellung <http://www.transmediale.de/de/festival/programme/exhibition1>* und die* Gastausstellung Time & Motion: Redefining Working Life <http://www.transmediale.de/de/festival/programme/exhibition2>*. Im Rahmen des Eröffnungsprogramm wird auch die Videoinstallation *Hoax_Canular <http://www.transmediale.de/de/content/hoaxcanular-0>* von* Dominic Gagnon* im Theatersaal gezeigt, es gibt Aktivitäten und Getränke im Foyer und Djs auf der Café Global-Bühne. Um mehr zur Eröffnung und zu vielen weiteren CAPTURE ALL-Veranstaltungen herauszufinden, besuchen Sie bitte unsere Website <http://www.transmediale.de/de>. Wir freuen uns darauf, Sie beim Festival begrüßen zu dürfen! Kristoffer Gansing, Artistic Director Unsubscribe from this newsletter <http://www.transmediale.de/newsletter/confirm/remove/1a9447c62e23185t8728> -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan 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