[P2P-F] Fwd: open capital License?

Tue Feb 5 12:50:27 CET 2013

@Patrick
thanks we mostly agree except that you dont take into account that most of
the time we need exterior investment from someone that doesnt want the
resulting product for personal use.

@Michel I mostly agree with the Metacurrency project.

@all

Definitions:

Peer production and peer governance:
1) The ability of producers to create groups which are governed by
themselves and their ability to own and trade their product of labor.
2) The ability of the consumers to decide which product will be created by
a group of producers and their ability to bargain directly with the
producers..
3)The tools are owned by the consumers.

These 3 provide a forth property:
Production is non-exclusive. If consumers want more product, new groups of
producers emerge that satisfy that need.
 In other words, production is driven by need and any person can take part
in it.
That is why I call this peer production.

Now, we could define peer/open money as the money that only allows peer
production to occur.

This is in my opinion a precise definition. We have given a property to
money based on the production processes that it allows.
It might seem counterintuitive to do so. After all, the production process
is defined by the relations of the workers and consumers in the production
process, money is an abstract thing.
I have already given an example of how banks control the production process
but one could answer that from a theoretical perspective.

The theory of Commodity_fetishism<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_fetishism>
is
a good start. That theory in essence explains how people believe that the
value of a commodity(in cash, not use-value) (and subsequently cash itself)
is
intrinsic to the commodity itself, ie it is a property of the commodity
when in fact that value is governed by the social structures that took
part in its production.
Setting rules on money ,then, is nothing more that setting rules on the
production process and vice verca.

So, as a conclusion, we need to change the rules that govern money if we
want peer production to flourish.

2013/2/5 Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>

> answer via fb:
>
>
> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/ouishare.money/299740970149341/?ref=notif&notif_t=group_comment#>
>  Etienne Zoupic Hayem <https://www.facebook.com/zoupic> Metacurrency
> (Eric Harris Braun & Arthur Brock) answered this with : Open rules, Open
> transport, open data.
> Open Tules : you can see the rules and edit them
> Open Transport : the flows happen in an open source environment with
> transparency
> Open Data : you can/could access anybody's datas, flow, history
>
> For a complementary currency scheme today, there are 2 things that do
> interest me, 2 maps, and they need to be visible, accessible and
> transparent in order for me to assess a system :
> - flow of the currency : rules of creation, how and when, rules of
> circulation : where and how, rules of desctruction, how and where.
> - rules of governance : who created the currency scheme, who decides it
> now, who can decide / edit / modify the scheme, how do I enter the
> governance's scheme??
>
> When the first map gives me the model of the currency : its vision,
> mission, goal and design ie : mechanism chosen, the second map gives me the
> power concentration or division
>
> The big difficulty with money when you speak about tradable goods is that
> it is an agreement :
> So if you fork, your change the rules. Which is what is happening between
> bitcoin and freicoin, they are not using the same software cause if you
> fork and chose your own system, changing's the design scheme then you can't
> trade anymore with the other one.
>
> So while in GPL or software code I could go alone for my new distribution
> and I would/could have users taking it further in 20 years, when I create a
> money or currency scheme, I need other players alive to agree the same
> rules as me at the same moment or there will be no game exchanges. Forking
> alone is stupid with a monetary scheme because it's a collective game.
>
> So a GPL licence for money would be :
> - Everybody can see the code of creation
> - Everybody can propose modifications as long as it is accepted by others
> / majority / the community (to be defined)
> - you are free to replicate the design of this currency elsewhere
>
> Does it answer your question?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
> Date: Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:15 PM
> Subject: [P2P-F] open capital License?
> To: p2p-foundation <p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org>
>
>
> Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
>
>
>
> --
> 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
>

-- 

Sincerely yours,

     Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20130205/4e1a4be4/attachment.htm 