I do think this documentary is misleading and one sided by equating network theory ideology almost exclusively with Randian's right-wing and anti-social influence, for a counterview, see Fred Turner, From Counterculture to *Cyberculture* which stresses the relationship between network thinking and emancipatory traditions, Michel On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Nicholas Roberts <[email protected]>wrote:
http://rutube.ru/tracks/4487452.html?v=2baf06c898b2262d9b20ac3b3382effc&auto...
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/all-watched-over-by-machines-of-loving-grace/
All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace 2011 <http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/release/2011/>Society<http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/category/society/>45 Comments<http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/all-watched-over-by-machines-of-loving-grace/#disqus_thread>
[image: All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace]A series of films about how humans have been colonized by the machines they have built. Although we don’t realize it, the way we see everything in the world today is through the eyes of the computers. It claims that computers have failed to liberate us and instead have*distorted and simplified our view of the world around us*.
*1. Love and Power*. This is the story of the dream that rose up in the 1990s that computers could create a new kind of stable world. They would bring about a new kind global capitalism free of all risk and without the boom and bust of the past. They would also abolish political power and create a new kind of democracy through the Internet where millions of individuals would be connected as nodes in cybernetic systems – without hierarchy.
*2. The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts*. This is the story of how our modern scientific idea of nature, the self-regulating ecosystem, is actually a machine fantasy. It has little to do with the real complexity of nature. It is based on cybernetic ideas that were projected on to nature in the 1950s by ambitious scientists. A static machine theory of order that sees humans, and everything else on the planet, as components – cogs – in a system.
*3. The Monkey in the Machine and the Machine in the Monkey*. This episode looks at why we humans find this machine vision so beguiling. The film argues it is because all political dreams of changing the world for the better seem to have failed – so we have retreated into machine-fantasies that say we have no control over our actions because they excuse our failure.
Adam Curtis is a documentary film maker, whose work includes The Power of Nightmares <http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-power-of-nightmares/>,The Century of the Self<http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-century-of-the-self/> , The Mayfair Set <http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/mayfair-set/>, Pandora’s Box <http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/pandoras-box/>, The Trap<http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-trap/> and The Living Dea <http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-living-dead/>
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Nicholas Roberts < [email protected]> wrote:
why does the OSE exclude actually existing open-source, public domain technologies i.e. crafts such as wood work, knitting and fabrics, gardening, fermenting, cooking, animal husbandry etc?
these largely oral traditions defy easy modelling, try and do a Blender file for a mandella garden or a food forest ? there is a wealth of traditional knowledge that is being lost and has substantially more value than a top down techno-utopian benevolent dictatorship
in nearly all fields of human endeavour now, there is a festish for computerization, automation, virtualization and modelling
in finance, science, economics, architecture there is a market advantage to being able to present a gee-whiz computer model, an interactive graphic, something that looks good on a screen or in CAD
we've come a very long way from the back-to-the-land movement of the 60s and 70s - which was inspired by and inspired works like Christopher Alexanders A Pattern Language - which was based on living patterns from nature, from existing human settlements
the engineering approach to life is reaching a fundamental limitation, the earth is overloaded by human machine like designs and their manifestations i.e a stream becomes a culverted drain, a lake becomes a hydro-electric power generating dam, a food forest becomes a plantation, and now a village becomes a lego set
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]
wrote:
hi Nicholas, can you elaborate on that critique? have you written anything else on it?
there are some quite heavy accusations in here ... totalitarianism, fetish, which would need some backup <g>
Michel
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Nicholas Roberts < [email protected]> wrote:
personally I think that while the OSE project is idealistic and technically interesting, its also totalitarian, naive and a dangerous distraction from existing social systems, craft movements and appropriate technology
its a kind of utopian new age totalitarianism, with a digital fabrication and software development festish... if you cant model it, design it, it doesnt exist
real-life just doesn't work like that, you might be able to insulate yourself from that if you've got a stream of volunteers, a large number of donors etc, but really it only works for those principals at the core
the problem isn't a design problem, it's a social and political one
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Devin Balkind < [email protected]> wrote:
Ben. The free/libre/opensource movement needs to communicate more strategically with the public: marketing materials, user-friendly design, branding, apparel, music, parties etc. We also need complete narratives. One reason I was so drawn to OSE<http://www.ted.com/talks/marcin_jakubowski.html>is that the project had such a complete story that fits within a comfortable narratives: high-tech homestead, DY farming, etc. A friend told me last night how she thought the concept of 'recycling' has prepared the public to understand open source and that people wouldn't be able to comprehend the message five years ago. So yes, I'm interested in marketing the free/libre/opensource movement to the mainstream public and would love to connect about this issue.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Benjamin Brownell < [email protected]> wrote:
Hi Sam,
I respect the committed work at knowledge centers like the Land Institute, and P2PF here. I met Wes Jackson 10 or 12 years ago and was really awed by his mild, strong and principled demeanor, doing something very different in and for 'the heartland' of US and our pastoral production paradigms. And there is certainly proof-of-concept scattered about in coop and other forms, worldwide. I've visited a range of experimental sites and parleyed with many outstanding individuals and groups on the roads to integrally sound human existence. I've indulged my own vision for a safe sane supportive space, through land-based community studies and participation over several years and ecoregions, with the aim to share compelling stories in a kind of improv road-show and online diary (and tracking what others have done in this regard). I am an impatient person, and we are faced with urgent, growing, challenges. Even stepping back to a more academic/historical view, there's a lot of repatterning and propagation to carry out quickly. I just don't see the open knowledge program hitting home on its own--even missionary zeal has only afforded an approximately linear outreach. Net tech is a key new part of the program, but there still seems a large quantum barrier before the mainstream picks up. This is a competitive cultural evolution, and like it or not in important ways we're all effectively one culture now, float or flunk. That culture has leverage points though, if we look close at how it has been seduced and constrained toward current dysfunctions. This can be transverse-engineered.
Let's posit that there is a potential for tremendous demand/appreciation growth across demographics for sustainable culture forms that are not unrecognizable from within current system. Let's agree that the more people we can see heading in that general direction, shifting their attention, their inquiry, action and investment, the better for all. Let's say we don't have a half-century to watch this unfold 'organically' (not that I have any rigorous forecasts here, but certainly there's risk of agonizing sloth and stickiness). I see a challenge and opportunity to co-opt the mechanisms of market promotion for good. This is in fact selling people on 'something they didn't even know they needed' and yet it's also a product which, experientially, can 'sell itself' too--once it reaches people where they are at. That's the crux really, raising visibility and viability and fecundity of alternatives, in a competitive, contaminated, cultural landscape. This has a lot to do with money, media, and make-believe.
The discussion gets ethically queasy in a hurry, and if you take it all that seriously, it's probably going to force you to look away and stick with familiar staid method. It's beyond serious--it's the future of everything we identify with; but in a way this is also a game, and I suggest that the real results we get from playing enlightendly within the rules for a new set of goals, are definitive. Also, I'm not here to connive and convince anyone about ends justifying means, I want to present a personal perspective and a way forward that makes clear sense to who I am and what my unique background could provide for a powerful parallel track of transition, one that I do believe at this point is critical. If it adds up to some interest or seems worthy of strategic evaluation, please continue to engage.
I am writing out more of the ideas that come up for me in contemplation here, and some features in the emerging web-world that hold promise. I'd really like to have a live chat and sketch session on this range of topics with any/all of you soon. Let me first perhaps gather some instructive links to share for a better image of new tactics at work in some of the ways I imagine...I'm still away from my regular workspace a day or two, but will update soon!
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Samuel Rose <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Michel Bauwens < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > copied to the list for any extra discussants ... > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Benjamin Brownell < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Yes, thank you Michel, I could use a bit more discussion on the > side with this! I believe I have connected briefly with Nicholas (of > Permaculture.coop yes?) and mean to indicate his projects in the piece. Let > me keep fitting in some specific ideas/applications/examples to give a more > complete picture in a couple of days...any thoughts welcome although I am in > poor contact for the weekend ahead mostly. > >> Sam, Steve, Nick hello--I haven't got much personal context to > share as introduction at the moment ('profile') which is maybe why I'm > thinking so hard about cultural reconfig towards more amenable > circumstance...but wide backgrounding in media, community, design, science, > spirit, sport; and speculation :) You might intuit some things from my > twitte stream at v17us though. > >> Happy to expand in chat or do a little co-writing/drawing with > anyone interested! Pac Time, US skype:sola2b > >> > > > In my humble opinion, if you are truly interested in Permaculture > approaches, the first best group to connect with is > http://www.landinstitute.org/ > > If you are interested in building community based agricultural > enterprises around permaculture, that can work now in the existing > ecology, check http://www.organicvalley.coop/ > > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Michel Bauwens < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> hi Benjamin, > >>> > >>> this promises to be very interesting, > >>> > >>> I think they are at least some people that share your concerns of > marrying eco-agriculture, with p2p social systems, and that can scale > through open design cooperation ... > >>> > >>> I hope you don't mind I put some people in cc that have been > active in the field, > >>> > >>> Michel > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Benjamin Brownell < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Michel, thank you for the response--very fair points. I have > allowed some time to continue processing these ideas (and > implications/applications), and begun a more focused article suggesting > opportunities for integration of the new peer IT capabilities with healthy > surplus-oriented food production. A complicated subject that still ties into > many others...but one I feel is not getting adequate attention as the real > foundation (and weakpoint) of transition to stable social systems. Anyhow, > I'm still pulling things together, but if you'd like to look at some starter > paragraphs and a diagram to see if it may be more on track for publication, > here they are: > >>>> > >>>> Sufficiency Alert > >>>> > >>>> Please let’s come to the table. Subsistence is basic. Stable > primary production of safe complete foods is severely lagging in the larger > play for a peer-oriented economy at present, and this ‘pinch point’ is a > clear target of exploitation and mismanagement by new and old malignant > control structures. Agricultural land is bubbling on international markets > now; water, genomic and sundry ecocidal shenanigans are spreading. Demand > for food is non-negotiable, and trumps all kinds of ethical, democratic, > conscientious preference: without viable alternatives in place, industrial > agri-facture is more omnipotent than oil. > >>>> > >>>> Models for sustainable transition bifurcate around the challenge > of current centralizations in society, advocating towards equally fanciful > (in scaling) extremum of dark/bright green, where food is either radically > re-localized and re-personalized (think homestead + barter), or production > is further concentrated in efficient enclosed modular sun-fueled terrariums, > perhaps as a sort of next-gen municipal service. Both routes are > fundamentally challenged by under-acknowledged economic realities, and the > grand chaordic system that is human culture. > >>>> > >>>> What kind of realistic middle road could we open up? I want to > sketch a program for rapidly scaling polyvictual production centers within > current land use/tenure and market regulations, as an agile catalyst of > higher-order peer economics for resilient diversity. Permaculture is an > excellent application framework, tried and true (and intentionally evolving) > over 30 years in a range of circumstance. But as founder Bill Mollison has > noted, it’s intrinsic sufficiency is paradoxically dampening to economic > activity and integration with larger systematics. It is a salubrious > containerized steady state, rather in line with ‘dark green’ outlook, above. > >>>> > >>>> Permaculture, transition, global/eco-villaging, human-scale > development, are all sound models that hold up well in practice. They are > scalable, but they’re not meant to scale--it is not a built-in property, > they are cultural introverts. As opt-in (/out) ethical leisure-fests, they > are in fact self-marginalizing and proto-apocalyptic from the median > standpoint. Culture is a competitive field, where presently the old rules > are perceptibly moribund. This is an immense opportunity to creatively > expand play. But how to build bridges and hold hands with a vastly inertial > society, and truly lead forward? There has got to be a rich and accessible > surplus from the new territory, in conventional terms, and a reciprocal > value/appreciation towards the old. We need liquid capital, and a dummified > ROI! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Michel Bauwens < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> hi Ben, > >>>>> > >>>>> I"m generally an easy editor as long as the piece is readable, > which your piece is, > >>>>> > >>>>> however, if there is a main thesis, I feel it is a bit to > elliptically described, so perhaps somewhere, perhaps as an intro paragraph, > you should make sure that your main point is summarized; I'd also like to > know as reader, what new things this new wave of platforms is bringing to > the table that wasn't there before? > >>>>> > >>>>> I think it should have a more catchy title as well, > >>>>> > >>>>> and finally, that last word, is that on purpose, or a type: > revaluolation! > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Benjamin Brownell < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Curious if you have looked at this yet? I can understand if it > is not solid enough for Foundation blog, or even for easy feedback...but let > me know if you have some idea to proceed. I will keep exploring directions > to bridge collectivism into the 'ordinary' - obese societal production > infrastructures...and underlying values. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Michel, I've collected some thoughts in a doc here, if you > want to take a look: > >>>>>>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/10BgjvyNuie_1oMtkb4Li9ZVzAUSei_1uwivvzkz1... > >>>>>>> It's kind of far reaching and preachy, I couldn't help...but > if there are just a couple parts you would prefer to get more detail on, and > leave the rest for me to put elsewhere, let me know--no problem! > >>>>>>> I hope it can lead to a bit more discussion, and then some > wiki editing, and even solid tests and steps.. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net > >>>>> > >>>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: > http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation > >>>>> > >>>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; > http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; > http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net > >>> > >>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: > http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation > >>> > >>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; > http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; > http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net > > > > Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: > http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation > > > > Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; > http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; > http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > -- > Sam Rose > Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC > Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 > email: [email protected] > http://hollymeadcapital.com > http://p2pfoundation.net > http://futureforwardinstitute.com > http://socialmediaclassroom.com > > "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human > ambition." - Carl Sagan >
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- Devin Balkind Director, Sarapis Foundation [email protected] @devinbalkind
_______________________________________________ P2P Foundation - Mailing list http://www.p2pfoundation.net https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens