headers
Stefan Merten | 12 Dec 2011 12:01
Picon
Favicon

[ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

Hi!

[Since the workshop was in German I'm cc-ing the German list.]

Last Saturday I attended the workshop

	     COM' ON! - Die alte Eigentumswelt dreht sich

See http://commons.rosalux.de/ for the homepage.

The workshop has been organized by the Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung which
is the foundation of the party "Die Linke" in Germany. "Die Linke" is
the socialist party in Germany. As far as I understood the Keimform
people co-organized this event.

The workshop has been attended by about 40 persons. At least 8 of them
were on the Oekonux list at some point. It was very nice to meet all
these people again - some of them I had not met since years.

Some other people came from the broader commons debate. Most of the
remaining attendees I'd consider coming from the classical left which
is of course what "Die Linke" is.

The topic of the workshop was: What does the concept of commons mean
for the left in general and for "Die Linke" in particular.

Well, I'm not really into this commons debate but my impression is
this: It is composed of two discourses which IMHO have nothing to do
with each other. One of the discourses is the commons based peer
production discourse which is put forward by people like StefanMz and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Christian Siefkes | 15 Dec 2011 18:56

[ox-de] Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

Hi Stefan and all,

On 12/12/2011 12:01 PM, Stefan Merten wrote:
> Last Saturday I attended the workshop
> 
> 	     COM' ON! - Die alte Eigentumswelt dreht sich
> 
> See http://commons.rosalux.de/ for the homepage.
...
> Well, I'm not really into this commons debate but my impression is
> this: It is composed of two discourses which IMHO have nothing to do
> with each other. One of the discourses is the commons based peer
> production discourse which is put forward by people like StefanMz and
> ChristianS. I.e. the topic of this list. The other discourse is a very
> classical left discourse with all the same old, same old questions and
> approaches. Here are some aspects which IMHO mark the boundary:
> 
> * Appropriation of means of production
> 
>   Part of the left commons discourse seems to be the classical
>   discussion about power relationships. As one example the power over
>   means of production is discussed in the form that the means of
>   production must be appropriated from the current owners. That
>   reflects closely the classical discussion that the working class
>   should be owner of the means of production.
> 
>   In the peer production discourse this question - which is of course
>   an important one - is answered differently: Let's build the means of
>   production ourselves. This is a very different approach.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Lehor Meius | 16 Dec 2011 10:56

Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

Hi

Just wanted to add my opinion on this. :)

It is my belief, that "classical" left (pre-60's) opinion proceeds from 
agricultural and basic production (from "earth" if you wish). Peer 
production originates from the realms of virtual production (or 
"heaven"). Perhaps the conflict arises because in the virtual world the 
ideal of Marx ("voluntary association of independent producers") is in 
some cases already a reality.

In modern times the virtual and basic production are no longer separate 
worlds, since ICT is integrated more and more into everything and brings 
its logic along with it into new sectors of production.

The aim, I belive, is still the same - both movements originally want 
to give the individuals control over the means of production so they 
could produce their own livelihood. In the virtual realm means of 
production can be reproduced for every single individual. In the realm 
of natural resources, energy, land this is not possible, so they have to 
be seized in some manner for different modes of usership. (However, the 
ICT world has also some experience with common physical resources, since 
the physical infrastructure or bandwidth of the internet could perhaps 
be viewed that way).

Nevertheless in the realm of physical resources the original left 
theories might still be relevant, even if this is no longer true for 
production.

On identity politics - I don't think they can be considered classically
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Patrick Anderson | 16 Dec 2011 23:41
Picon

Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

> "physical" requires land and energy
> "virtual" doesn't require such things.

This is true for virtual things as concepts,
but not for any *instance* of such things.

Every virtual thing requires the physical
to host and express that virtual concept.

For example, a computer program can
exist conceptually, as an idea that may
eventually be discovered - without any
amount of land or energy.

But when someone dreams of that idea,
and when they try to show others, they
will need to use their hands or voices to
enter that idea into a physical computer.

That computer will need land on which
it will sit, and energy which it will use to
host and express that concept.

If we do not admit the physical basis of
the virtual realm, we will never be able to
host computing for our own benefit, but
will instead continue to rely upon Google,
Amazon, the ISPs, etc. to own those
Means of Production while they continue
to use them against us.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Diego Saravia | 17 Dec 2011 21:45
Picon

Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

> This is true for virtual things as concepts,
> but not for any *instance* of such things.

the marginal cost of so many virtual "things" is almost 0

so in practical terms are free (not only perhaps "libres"), but with 0 cost
for whom uses them
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt@...
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Patrick Anderson | 17 Dec 2011 21:56
Picon

Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

Diego Saravia wrote:
> the marginal cost of so many virtual "things" is almost 0
>
> so in practical terms are free (not only perhaps "libres"),
> but with 0 cost for whom uses them

If virtual things are 0 cost to use, I wonder why Google
spends so much to host those things...

Why do they pretend to spend so much to house and
deliver petabytes of video data from YouTube?

Why do all of us pay so much to ISPs when we could
just connect with each other for no cost at all?

Why does Wikipedia continue asking for funds?  Are
they just pocketing the money?

For a less sarcastic analysis, see:
http://www.oekonux.org/list-en/archive/msg04253.html
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt@...
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Diego Saravia | 18 Dec 2011 02:36
Picon

Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

> Why do all of us pay so much to ISPs when we could
> just connect with each other for no cost at all?

do you pay a variable rate or a fixed rate?

I pay a fixed rate so for me, marginal cost is 0.

For google earns money from its operations

--

-- 
Diego Saravia
Diego.Saravia@...
NO FUNCIONA->dsa@...
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt@...
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Lehor Meius | 20 Dec 2011 11:15

Re: [ox-en] Report from COM'ON workshop: Dam builders and ship builders

Yes, this is true, but the difference comes from viewpoint. For someone 
who works mostly with software, the abudance seems normal order of 
things. And for someone who works with resources and basic production, 
abudance seems like something that would perhaps be possible with major 
political and economic rearrangements in society.

The differences between Peer Producers and old Left appear from their 
different locations in the production system. But truly new society is 
possible only when the total reality of production and culture is 
considered and therefore it seems to me, that new and old ideologies 
must merge into a new coherent ideological system for the 21st century.

L.

On 17.12.2011 00:41, Patrick Anderson wrote:
>> "physical" requires land and energy
>> "virtual" doesn't require such things.
>
> This is true for virtual things as concepts,
> but not for any *instance* of such things.
>
> Every virtual thing requires the physical
> to host and express that virtual concept.
>
> For example, a computer program can
> exist conceptually, as an idea that may
> eventually be discovered - without any
> amount of land or energy.
>
> But when someone dreams of that idea,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Lehor Meius | 1 Jan 2012 14:19

[ox-en] Intellectual capital and social management

http://www.kernelmag.com/comment/opinion/2011/12/its-the-intellectual-capital-stupid/

This article made me think that if intellectual capital has become so 
important for enterpreneurs, perhaps this fact can help to bring 
together left and right wing of alternative economics: prehaps some well 
thought-out system for social management of traditional capital (direct 
democratic? technocratic?) can provide a better platform for 
intellectual enterpreneurship than current political-economic system?

Anyway, a bright and prosperous new year to everyone!
Lehor
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt@...
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane