[P2P-F] Fwd: Social charters for material production [was: FLOK >< Cybersyn}

[Michel Bauwens]

reply to bob haugen on the difference between sensorica and the p2p-f
approach


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
Date: Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: Social charters for material production [was: FLOK >< Cybersyn}


thanks Bob,

let me go straight to how I see the difference with Sensorica, it's not
that it is about all kinds of work and about hardware, as contrasted to the
CBRL

all work is material, but all work incorporates knowledge and if that
knowledge is formalized as knowledge, code or design, the CBRL approach
applies

so our license is actually designed for the material economy, to allow a
cooperative economy to emerge

the difference in my view lies in the relation between the commons and the
market

I want to insulate the commons more, which means that when people work
voluntarily for the commons, it is not related to the market, but only when
they are paid as cooperators

in Sensorica's vision, as I understand it, all commons work can be
indirectly remunerated since all work is recorded

the second difference is that Tibi sees all formal organisational formats
as outdated, while I think they will continue to exist; of course, the
DAO's may also institute a intermediary regime of informal temporary
organisations bound by DAO smart contracts,

but essentially, Sensoria is an organized network, not an organization

for sensorica, there is no wall between the commons and the market, for me,
it's better if there is one,

hope that makes sense,

Michel


On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Bob Haugen <bob.haugen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Michel,
>
> I changed the subject a bit and excerpted some statements from a
> couple of your messages to ask a question (below the excerpts).
>
> <excerpts>
> as you likely now, my instantiation is centered around the creation of
> open and ethical enterpreneurial coalitions, that co-produce commons,
> and that start applying open book accounting and open supply chains in
> their collaborative practices (a la Curto Cafe), using commons-based
> reciprocity licenses as their binding social charter,
>
> [...]
>
> The basic idea of open coops is explained here:
>
> http://p2pfoundation.net/Why_We_Need_a_New_Kind_of_Open_Cooperativism_for_the_P2P_Age
> and elaborated here:
>
> http://p2pfoundation.net/From_the_Communism_of_Capital_to_a_Capital_for_the_Commons
>
> At the core of such coops, intended to create cooperative
> enterpreneurial coalitions, is
>  the proposal to use a new kind of license, commons-based reciprocity
> licenses, a first instantiation of which is , though I don't like its
> too explicit political language, the Peer Production License,
> http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_License
>
> Essentially such a license creates open knowledge, with one exception:
>
> * allows full use by not for profit and common good oriented entities
> * allows full use by self-owned enterpreneurial entities
> * allows full use by for-profits who contribute
>
> so the one exception is for-profits who do not contribute, who have to
> pay for the use of the license; the idea is less the money flow, but
> the recreation of a moral economy and social charter about
> reciprocity, to be defined by coalition itself
> </excerpts>
>
> Question: that social charter (the PPL) focuses on "intellectual
> property": '“Work” means the literary and/or artistic work offered
> under the terms of this License'.
>
> Sensorica's value network concept, by contrast, deals with all kinds
> of work, especially those involved in creating material goods. I
> understand from past conversations that you *do* want the ideas of
> peer-to-peer mutual coordination to apply to all kinds of production.
> Sensorica's idea of a social charter, as I understand it, includes the
> distribution of income from sales of goods and services, back along
> the network of value producing activities that went into those goods
> and services. Not only through one organization, but also among other
> organizations that contributed to the outcomes.
>
> That obviously does not lessen the money flow, but it does establish
> reciprocity. I am curious how you would deal with the social charter
> and reciprocity in the production of material goods, especially in
> this period of transition. And if you know of other examples of doing
> something like that, and how their social charters work.
>
> I am not trying to persuade anybody about anything regarding
> Sensorica's concept here. Their first real value equation is just now
> being formulated. I use them as an example of a social charter for the
> production of more than intellectual works, with the goal of
> developing the means for people to make a living in these experiments
> toward a better economy (although making a living from their work is
> not yet a reality in their case, either).
>



-- 
*Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no
record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..*

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/



-- 
*Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no
record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..*

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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20140802/71cc1258/attachment.htm