about p2p and the big picture
What i miss in all the sophisticated opinions on how to make the world better is the simple data about possibilitys.
Food is massproduced in areas where its cheapest and then delivered globally to where its sold for best price,the products
are made by brands that sell different tastes, how could a global commons oriented food managment do the job, and what would be the outcome? Is it really true that without massproduction and monocultures the diversity of available food would
be lower then today, especially when production on demand can come in as well as ressource cost dependent distribution
could like also work , even without money in a system thats values any social activity with benefit points that could be spend on luxary goods same as a surplus in money, and besides that food can also produced indoor at a cost of energy.
How much energy could be available when global managment would enable optimized energy production like solar upwind energy or solar mirror power stations in the desert and sunny regions, wind in the windy regions and so on.
What does the world really have and what is wasted in competition and miscalculation?What do we actually loose in the unefficency that comes from competition and low quality products that are only produced to be cheap and profitable, but never really do the job, for example all the bad tools for non proffesional crafting.I have thrown away so many tools that never really done a good job, or didnt last a very long time.If all the leaders, borders and companys would just dissapear, what would we be left with, there wouldnt be less ressources on earth, but what are the real demands of the individuals?
I think a great problem is that we actually fear the needs of our peers, like humans have an endless stomach and an endless desire to consume and have status symbols rather then having a great time.
Can we not by now technologically fight crime by monitoring the earths happenings, if we give up a bit privacy that usually is only needed by those who want to hide things, if we for that get a world where you dont need to hide things?
Money or not, is it acceptable to gamble with food, housing and medical care, where just noone really wants to life with second best solutions.What is shared knowledge if theres no chance of ever practicing "how it should be done best"?
Is there so much controversy of things that have proofen to function? Like why is it not possible to build area specific housing, for example hurricane safe houses in hurricane areas, the poor people build up there wood houses again and again, is there not plenty of ressources of all kinds to save if its done right from the very beginning? How much does that really depend on the availability (theoretically if money wasnt an option) of ressources that are potentially available?
Or think about digital art, where you can produce many times faster with high cost solutions then by using freeware, what do we actually loose in potential creation by having competitions on the tools?
Or computing time, the usa has super computers to spy and collect large amounts of data, what could these machines do for the organising of equal and fair living.
And from the moral side there will always be Thomas paine for me and agraian justice, no matter how the world is organized, if theres nothing left for some while others own the land that actually IS ressource, do they not owe the others at least the basic supply for a living.
And how much work would really have do be done for the commons to actually have an amazing standart for everyone, what actually has a commons or p2p based production to offer against the american dream that with unlimited money you have access to unlimited goods, when in reality any stomach can only be filled so and so much.
For those like Orsan, that to me actually made the bridge between p2p theory and global revolution, i wish those data to be around, giving arguments on why and how other forms of organisation are more beneficial, and that not only for the poor, because even rich people have to breath the same polluted air.
Can we acually abandon private transportation and fancy cars if there is no need to hurry to a job that we only do for money, and how good could organized commons owned transportation be, would it really make us less mobile with all the possibilitys that technically exsist?
Or is it just a fact that we want to create our own individual things no matter how unefficent they are, and that we handle out freedom by handling out the right to limit what can be done to groups of people that are actually effected by these acts.
Is incompatibility a right or a failure of innovation, especially when it harms others, or wastes ressource?
How would p2p and commons change things when it would be able to replace todays organizing forms on a large or global scale...
In reality i really wonder what impact michel might have for equador, but on the other hand, with global hirachys, food and production in the hands of a tiny number of large cooperations, the contact surface is very small, the number of enemys, like the 1%....is limited.But i really think people fear that there is not much to gain individually, and fear their peers hunger.
I really miss visions that are based on the big picture of possibilitys that exsist, i miss the chance to get overviews of whats really going on,i miss backed up complain of what we loose, like what do we take away from our children when they explore the internet for music, and they are not free to listen to everything and mix everything, because music is a buissness, not able to read and learn everything because knowledge and art are buissnesses, how many artists in all kinds we loose when they never make it to be an artists because they have to work for a living in competition to all the others, selling insurances or building cheap products or doing other second third best things to earn money.
What would be obsolete and what could be done with the saved ressource in reality, by real numbers and facts, the promise of a real change, and as obama won with just the word change and nothing to offer behind it, does the mayority not want "changes"? I wish i would have had more data on many things when is was studying all the sophisticated thoughts over the last couple of years i was into p2p, since i saw michel talking about the transition of society from servant to peer, things to spread and actually impeach the system, especially when i feel the same spirit in so many groups from nature protection activists to anonymous hackers.
Transparency and data processing, what is really going on, is it technologycally still impossible to gather and map out how the world functions?-i still cant believe it is, and if it isnt, who and what is in the way of gaining arguments that things can acually made better for the whole earth?
How much energy is wasted when people again and again become activists, create groups , work on ideas seperated and without any impact force on the real organisation of things, how many people really identify with the abstract group they are into their nation, their country, that they never even have the time to fully explore, what do they have in common with the groups they are forced into by birth....tho of course there are natural borders like islands, still coca-cola can cross all that bridges and serve the same taste globally, so global acting is no weird utopian idea isnt it?
To accuse the 1% to be wrong, it needs arguments and facts to proof that they do not do a good job, not provide us with the best possible, not are the only and ultimate solution of how to offer us the tools to build our exsistance, but instead waste the worlds resources and create a system that leaves not much to do but rip of others to gain enough money, because small businesses cant be as cost efficent...of course there are small buissnesses, but how effcient are they usually how independent are they , how many actually serve indirectly big companys when they work with their products, like farmers having no real option then buy pesticides and crops from like monsanto because traditional farming is not competitive.
There are things that stand out, individuals that stand against doing wrong, but they are a minority, and afterall, in world happenings they only occupy a small percentage dont they? Sure they give good examples, but they never really effect the big picture of things happening, and they can not easily be taken by others to make a different kind of living, even if they share their knowledge on how they did it.
Is global revolution absurd when there is global internet? How can be shown what would be possible without knowing whats going on and being able to share these informations, how can anger be seeded among those that worked their status in the system without having a promise of success, and how people would handle their effords are obsolete, when they are confronted with the best solutions as only option?
Im trying to crossbridge some things, so be gentle and try to understand intention and things between the lines in what i want to say....i claim that more then half of the things people actually do are second best and obsolete under the recognition of facts and open knowledge, that people invent crappy things they would never try if they would face topics and issues centralized in global knowledge groups, and devided in local acting groups, like p2p would obviously function for me when it would be the system to decide and act upon earth.
Well i still dream a lot about such, seperated without being able to make contacts or contribute to a better world, and it makes me really sad i see so much suffering of nature and humans, and i just have to leave a tiny footprint and write something from time to time...i hope it makes sense to you and doesnt waste your time for being unspecific,and if you get the point about what i mean and find it vaild, please comment on the large scale promises p2p has to offer globaly, step away from real world acting just for a second and share your dreams and fears again just like michel did when he compared transition to p2p with the fall of roman empire, something i will never forget. I really miss those kinds of big thoughts, someone who dares to challenge more then just an aspect of a market, or the organistation of a small group, but the system itself in all its (false?) complexity...maybe you orsan...how can you crossbridge anonymous and occupy with the actual stuff featured on p2pf and life with the noncollaborative state of all the seperated activism lacking one vision of large scale changes that make the world better if a revolution would ever happen, that even tho very theoreticaly is provided by p2p theory as a whole, do you not lack visions of p2p as a concept to rule a united world...and how you keep faith that a united world is wanted by the different cultural groups or groups devided by natural borders, if they really exsist, or do you think that the different kinds of living consist on seperation and lack of global shared knowledge and ressource and collaboration only, like i do...do you think theres agreeable standarts that fit to people everywhere like i do?Do you after all this years think that a peer gives up or gains possibilitys in an equal fair and sustainable system that of course has laws that limit things you can do, as you never can gain as much power as an individuum in a group then in the world we have now where unlimited money means unlimited power, a thing that even reputation based impact in leading groups does not equal....
I really like the intention based idea of wellbeing as a goal to achieve that was mentioned in the stuff about equador, i hope it will be successful as can be and michel has a nice impact on that, oops i repeat myself...but anyways wouldnt even that be kinda partially obsolete if a world revolution could take place...i wonder what you people think how far we are from that...and why, theres so much more i would like to read about what promises p2p has to offer in a large scale, maybe theres enough open knowledge available to make equador a leading example of a culture of wellbeing and equality...with or without money, a basic free income or whatever.
Maybe its just me but im kinda confused with the many "good" ideas that get presented and never claim to be the best possible solution as they always have to connect to the state of being, and working under the current circumstances, like alternative currencys...at the end if there is one world sooner or later...there can be only one ...or is that thought to simple, basic system, but of course a diversity of ways to apply it to local circumstances, though i dont get why there shouldnt be exchange without trading, or trading without money or ressource distribution where its needed...or a state where all is great and just needs maintance...its said that people who have great possibilitys for themselves reproduce less or will population growth be an issue in a better world (i dont think so).
So much for my fastwritten 5 cent again after a longer time of personal issues, all the best to all of you

Daniel"theBoon"...professional daydreamer.

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation