[P2P-F] a new type of platform?

Tue Jul 19 16:44:11 CEST 2011

hi sam, and others,

perhaps a really stupid question, but it's a reaction I encountered when
presenting OSE:

- but all these machines are already a long time in the public domain ...

what about such an argument?

Michel

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm really interested in a 'constructive critique' of OSE ...
> >
> > here is some of my own:
> >
> > - first of all, Nicholas refers to the authoritarian tendencies ... as I
> see
> > it, this was certainly a problem in the beginning, when people expected
> OSE
> > to work as as a voluntary open source program, which I think it isn't.
> It's
> > a almost fully thought out vision from marcin, and the project is a
> vehicle
> > to bring that to fruition. It's like working for Avatar for Cameron, you
> > fully expect to be ordered around. What was not clear perhaps was this
> > underlying social contract, hence the early problem.  However, it seems
> > quite clear that this issue has been resolved, i.e. new volunteers are
> clear
> > about this expectation, and, that there is also funding, making this type
> of
> > relationship clearer as well. Nevertheless, it seems that Marcin has been
> > successfull in attracting a new layer of volunteers and that they are
> happy
> > with the level of participation they can bring, though it is true that
> the
> > ones I know are 'remote participants' .. For me, the Marcin approach is
> > legitimate, there needs to be place in the world for 'genial individuals'
> > who have a capacity to mobilize people and realize a vision. The key is
> that
> > you are aware of the implicit or explicit social contract.
> >
> > - I think the project has many merits, but it is also a limited one. It
> is a
> > vision of an autonomous village, but doesn't answer more global social
> > concerns like for example the commodity ecology of Mark Whitaker does.
> But
> > of course, it shouldn't. I.e. there must be room for systemic approaches
> > that touch communities as a whole, and core initiatives like Marcin,
> which
> > are meant to seed the broader environment with strong local
> subcommunities
> > with alternative logics, and of course, the latter's availability will
> > influence the former.
> >
> > Now, this is my provisional critique, but I don't really see the
> > totalitarian aspects.
> >
> > They're work is interoperable and open standard, so as I see it, others
> can
> > work on it, create variations, etc ...
> >
> > Michel
> >
>
>
> A practical critique:
>
> The designs need some work to be safe and usable machinery. I would
> feel safer using manual Amish equipment for building and farming over
> some of these designs. I've seen many of my farming relatives lose
> fingers, legs, and lives. This would happen much faster by way of
> distributed (internet mediated) collaboration, involving people who
> have genuine knowledge of design and engineering of the type of
> equipment proposed. Creating Blender files and posting them with
> descriptions to a wiki doesn't cut it for useful collaboration around
> design and engineering. There are working examples for how to
> collaborate in distributed ways around design in projects like RepRap,
> Arduino. Spend less time and energy on publicity, and more time on
> building a robust collaborative design infrastructure on the internet.
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Karl Robillard <krobillard at san.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Monday, July 18, 2011 09:00:40 pm Nicholas Roberts 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
> >>
> >> Everything in our world has a structural design.  Our bodies, our
> >> machines,
> >> our systems of production, our forms of government, and our environment.
> >>  Open
> >> source is about the absolute freedom to communicate and modify designs.
> >> This
> >> empowers people to understand, repair, replicate and customize the
> >> structures
> >> around them.  What's your beef against understanding the world?
> >>
> >> We live in the information age.  Software isn't a fetish, it's just the
> >> way we
> >> manipulate information.  Our new information tools are certainly
> >> revolutionary, but I don't see anything utopian about them.
> >>
> >>
> >> > 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
> >>
> >> Open source works for whoever wants to take advantage of it.  What you
> >> said
> >> could be said about any human endeavor.
> >>
> >>  "Super-stardom only works for artists who can attract enough fans!"
> >>  "Free markets only work for capitalists who can sell to enough
> >> customers!"
> >>  "Representative democracy only works for voters who can get their
> >> candidates
> >> elected!" (Heh... and not even then)
> >>
> >>
> >> > the problem isn't a design problem, it's a social and political one
> >>
> >> I agree, where the social problem happens to be that the designs for all
> >> the
> >> products we use and the institutions we must engage with are not open
> and
> >> easily modified.  Ha!  I take that back, the problem is very much a
> design
> >> problem - a problem of social design.  To advocate that people ought not
> >> spend
> >> time learning about the structure of things and communicating this
> >> knowledge
> >> to others is totalitarian.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Karl
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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 - Mailing list
> > http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> > https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Sam Rose
> Hollymead Capital Partners, LLC
> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
> 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
>

-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110719/786004e2/attachment.htm 