Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [decentralization] Generalizing Peer Production into the Physical World

Expand Messages
  • Julian Bond
    Mike Dierken Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:39:40 ... Err, what? The World of Ideas certainly does exist. But I m twisting the original ideas. The
    Message 1 of 28 , Nov 10, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Mike Dierken <dierken@...> Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:39:40
      >
      >> more seriously though Teilhard de Chardin's Noosphere (the world of ideas)
      >
      >> is increasingly indistinguishable from the world of things.

      >Sure, other than that the world of things exists and the world of ideas
      >doesn't.

      Err, what? The World of Ideas certainly does exist. But I'm twisting the
      original ideas. The point being that the virtual world of the internet
      keeps seeping out into the real world.

      Where's my augmented reality head up display. That's what I want to
      know. (and my one piece spandex jump suit, meals in pill form, personal
      hoverboard, cure for this disease, etc, etc)

      --
      Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
      Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
      Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
      *** Just Say No To DRM ***
    • Lucas Gonze
      ... EG, pi is implicit in every circular object. That makes it even more durable than the objects. ... Here is an example of seeping -- I have been playing
      Message 2 of 28 , Nov 10, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Julian Bond wrote:
        > Err, what? The World of Ideas certainly does exist.

        EG, pi is implicit in every circular object. That makes it even more
        durable than the objects.


        > But I'm twisting the
        > original ideas. The point being that the virtual world of the internet
        > keeps seeping out into the real world.


        Here is an example of seeping --

        I have been playing historical American music on guitar*. I learn it
        from scans of sheet music in historical archives at sites like the
        Library of Congress' and Duke University's. These archives contain
        primary sources intended for professional historians of music. They
        aren't for musicians to use in an everyday context, they are for the
        same people who also travel to go to specialized music libraries. I'm
        not one of those people. I'm using these resources to make music in
        places like bars and coffeehouses.

        I wouldn't go to a specialized music library to find stuff to play. I
        did try a couple times, but both times the work was way out of line with
        the goal. You need a series of appointments in-person, plus permission
        and equipment to make copies.

        There's nothing about my playing which is digital. It's as analog as I
        can make it. But this real world activity is only possible because of
        the internet. The compositions were long forgotten, usually lost to
        non-historians for at least a hundred years, and they showed few signs
        of life. And even if the sheet music were still in circulation in book
        stores, the practice of reading music is not very common.

        It only becomes possible for this music to be reanimated when the
        internet makes the archives available to enough eyeballs that they meet
        up with ordinary musicians who are able to read music and willing to
        play hopelessly obscure material. It's an internet solution to a
        physical problem. The stuff on either end is physical; there's
        historical sheet music on one side, and guitar players at open mic
        nights on the other side. But in the middle is the internet.

        And it's not an internet solution in the sense in which email is an
        incremental improvement on snail mail. The internet created the
        critical mass to enable peer production.

        -Lucas

        * see http://blog.gonze.com/category/mymusic/ for examples
      • Mike Dierken
        ... But the Internet is physical (electrons, silicon, copper, glass fiber, etc) ideas are not. That s the exists I was referring to. The statement that
        Message 3 of 28 , Nov 10, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          > It's an internet solution to a
          > physical problem. The stuff on either end is physical; there's
          > historical sheet music on one side, and guitar players at open mic
          > nights on the other side. But in the middle is the internet.
          >
          But the Internet is physical (electrons, silicon, copper, glass fiber, etc)
          ideas are not. That's the "exists" I was referring to.
          The statement that "[...] (the world of ideas) is increasingly
          indistinguishable from the world of things." seems ridiculous. Ideas
          actually are distinguishable from things. Sure, ideas can affect people and
          change their behavior and mass digital media has increased that rate of
          change, so it's extremely important. But saying they are indistinguishable
          sounds like intellectual puffery.
        • Julian Bond
          Mike Dierken Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:32:52 ... You re right of course. It s one of those trolls that sounds deep but doesn t actually say very
          Message 4 of 28 , Nov 11, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Mike Dierken <dierken@...> Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:32:52
            >But the Internet is physical (electrons, silicon, copper, glass fiber, etc)
            >ideas are not. That's the "exists" I was referring to.
            >The statement that "[...] (the world of ideas) is increasingly
            >indistinguishable from the world of things." seems ridiculous. Ideas
            >actually are distinguishable from things. Sure, ideas can affect people and
            >change their behavior and mass digital media has increased that rate of
            >change, so it's extremely important. But saying they are indistinguishable
            >sounds like intellectual puffery.

            You're right of course. It's one of those trolls that sounds deep but
            doesn't actually say very much. We've been having this debate at least
            since Negroponte's atoms vs bits and the philosophical underpinnings go
            back much further than that. But there does seem to be a qualitative
            change when so many of us make a living from manipulating symbols in the
            virtual world which then allows us to buy shiny toys in the real world.

            When an SUV driver blindly follows their GPS into a river and gets
            stuck, apart from being stupid, isn't that a failure to distinguish
            between the world of ideas and the world of things? Or is it just the
            same thing we've been doing for centuries in mistaking lines of ink on a
            map for real divisions between humans. Or a classic example of a 21st
            century behaviour; placing blind faith in technology before the evidence
            of our own senses and intelligence.[1]

            [1]Easy Travel To Other Planets. Ted Mooney. Two new emotions appeared
            in the 20th century. The feeling of being entirely alone in a crowd. The
            feeling of running as fast as possible without going anywhere.

            --
            Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
            Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
            Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
            *** Just Say No To DRM ***
          • Miles Fidelman
            ... More to play devil s advocate on a Sunday morning, than anything else... Are ideas indistinguishable from things, or vice versa? Ideas are often
            Message 5 of 28 , Nov 11, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Mike Dierken wrote:
              >> It's an internet solution to a
              >> physical problem. The stuff on either end is physical; there's
              >> historical sheet music on one side, and guitar players at open mic
              >> nights on the other side. But in the middle is the internet.
              >>
              >>
              > But the Internet is physical (electrons, silicon, copper, glass fiber, etc)
              > ideas are not. That's the "exists" I was referring to.
              > The statement that "[...] (the world of ideas) is increasingly
              > indistinguishable from the world of things." seems ridiculous. Ideas
              > actually are distinguishable from things. Sure, ideas can affect people and
              > change their behavior and mass digital media has increased that rate of
              > change, so it's extremely important. But saying they are indistinguishable
              > sounds like intellectual puffery.
              >
              More to play devil's advocate on a Sunday morning, than anything else...

              Are ideas indistinguishable from things, or vice versa?

              Ideas are often stored/represented as states of matter, or systems
              behavior. Consider:

              - the difference between two books: they may weigh the same, but what's
              printed on the pages makes all the difference, or,

              - a computer running a specific program behaves very differently than
              one running a different program, or one that's halted (and that can
              effect very physical things like energy used by that machine, or,

              - the physical states of our bodies are very much interdependent with
              what we are thinking, the activities of our autonomic nervous systems,
              and the state of various chemicals (natural and otherwise) in our
              bloodstreams.

              Is an endorphin "high" an idea or a physical state or both? What about
              being agitated?

              And then you can always look toward basic physics: energy and matter are
              interchangeable, as are energy and information content (entropy).
            • Scott Feamster
              In the middle, it s people among tangibles (sheet music and mics) and intangibles (thoughts and emotions). In the end, it s the intangibles that give our lives
              Message 6 of 28 , Nov 11, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                In the middle, it's people among tangibles (sheet music and mics) and
                intangibles (thoughts and emotions).

                In the end, it's the intangibles that give our lives meaning; e.g., love.

                Love is energy created by matter.

                -----Original Message-----
                From: decentralization@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:decentralization@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Miles Fidelman
                Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2007 7:36 AM
                To: decentralization@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [decentralization] Generalizing Peer Production into the
                Physical World


                Mike Dierken wrote:
                >> It's an internet solution to a
                >> physical problem. The stuff on either end is physical; there's
                >> historical sheet music on one side, and guitar players at open mic
                >> nights on the other side. But in the middle is the internet.
                >>
                >>
                > But the Internet is physical (electrons, silicon, copper, glass fiber,
                > etc) ideas are not. That's the "exists" I was referring to. The
                > statement that "[...] (the world of ideas) is increasingly
                > indistinguishable from the world of things." seems ridiculous. Ideas
                > actually are distinguishable from things. Sure, ideas can affect
                > people and change their behavior and mass digital media has increased
                > that rate of change, so it's extremely important. But saying they are
                > indistinguishable sounds like intellectual puffery.
                >
                More to play devil's advocate on a Sunday morning, than anything else...

                Are ideas indistinguishable from things, or vice versa?

                Ideas are often stored/represented as states of matter, or systems
                behavior. Consider:

                - the difference between two books: they may weigh the same, but what's
                printed on the pages makes all the difference, or,

                - a computer running a specific program behaves very differently than
                one running a different program, or one that's halted (and that can
                effect very physical things like energy used by that machine, or,

                - the physical states of our bodies are very much interdependent with
                what we are thinking, the activities of our autonomic nervous systems,
                and the state of various chemicals (natural and otherwise) in our
                bloodstreams.

                Is an endorphin "high" an idea or a physical state or both? What about
                being agitated?

                And then you can always look toward basic physics: energy and matter are
                interchangeable, as are energy and information content (entropy).


                Announce or discover P2P conferences on the P2P Conference Wiki at
                http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences
                Yahoo! Groups Links
              • cjenscook
                Hi Scott Although I m based in Linlithgow, Scotland (birthplace of Mary, Queen of Scots) I m not Scottish myself, just a mongrel. ... family, angel, or venture
                Message 7 of 28 , Nov 11, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Scott

                  Although I'm based in Linlithgow, Scotland (birthplace of Mary, Queen
                  of Scots) I'm not Scottish myself, just a mongrel.

                  --- In decentralization@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Feamster" <sf@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > What Chris describes is equity capital that we call friends and
                  family, angel, or venture capital investment in the U.S. Equity will
                  continue to provide the costliest investment dollars; debt will
                  continue to provide the cheapest investment dollars.
                  >

                  The "who" is immaterial.

                  It's the "how" of this new form of Equity that is entirely novel
                  (although, as I said, Canadian "Income Trusts" come close).

                  This is not "Equity" as in a Limited Company, and is a lot less
                  risky, albeit the returns MAY be less than those from Equity in a
                  Corporation, so are the risks.

                  Investors receive a proportional share of the revenues from the
                  property financed (whether Real property or IP) BEFORE the
                  management gets its hands on them.

                  If there are any revenues, of course.

                  In other words, in this model Labour works WITH Capital not FOR it,
                  and you don't get the "Principal/Agent" problem which
                  all "Corporations" have, and which is why there is a huge body of
                  Company law, and that famous oxymoron, "Corporate Social
                  Responsibility".

                  This "Open" form of Capital is an entirely new and simple
                  (unlike "mezzanine", convertibles, warrants etc etc) middle ground
                  between conventional "Debt" and "Equity", and in my experience comes
                  in a lot less expensive than conventional "Equity", but more
                  expensive than "Debt" wwith potential of a much greater return.

                  There cannot be a default, because it is not a "cost" or
                  an "overhead", but rather a "pre-distribution".

                  This is something entirely new, and it does take a bit of getting
                  your head around, for sure.

                  Best Regards

                  Chris
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.