Re: [ox-en] Re: [ox-en] DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT - CfC for the conference - DRAFT DRAFTDRAFT
- From: "Michel Bauwens" <michelsub2004 gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:08:13 +0700
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
First of all, let me just note that the description of the logic of the
sharing platforms, as a capitalist format but which enables the direct
creation of use value by user communities, is just a description, there is
nothing utopian about, it is just happening. What matters is to understand
this dynamic, from both sides. I think that one of the reasons that is
happening is just that it is a way to make money, and for the user
communities, a pragmatic way to share, in conditions in which they are not
easily able to create alternatives.
Sharing communities of creative individuals have weak network ties, unlike
in the commons format, where the proprietary formats create a group dynamic
and common party, and we can see that those communities create their own
institutional infrastructures. This reason, different proprietary licenses,
different combinations of communities and for profit companies, is the
reason why the distinction is important.
Are they progress or not. Well that depends whether you find it important
that hundreds of millions of additional humans are enabled to share or not.
Is it sufficient, no. But you can certainly built on the psychological and
sociological changes that a generalization of sharing induces. And the
conflicts inherent in the sharing economy, leads either to adaptation by the
platform owners, or to alternative commons production.
See http://www.re-public.gr/en/?p=261
Michel
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Dmytri Kleiner <dk telekommunisten.net>
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:45:32 +0100, Gregers Petersen <gp.ioa cbs.dk>
wrote:
Michel Bauwens wrote:
In the sharing economy, users are still creating and sharing use value,
but using proprietary platforms.
Can't say that I agree on this distinction - I have before made some
comments in regard to 'sharing cultures' (which also in essence have to
be recognized as 'economical systems'), and I don't really see the
argument for including any notion of proprietary platforms (unless you
somehow place your notion into some kind of step-by-step evolutionary
argument)?
Hi Michel, Gregers.
I have trouble with Michel's position here as well, for me it is too
categorical (sharing is sharing) and not sufficiently dialectic
(one form vs another).
These "proprietary systems of sharing" did not appear ex nihilo out
the imagination of TechCrunch readers, but rather where deliberately
built and funded, therefore we must look at what alternatives where
possible, and indeed already available, and why the choice was made
to fund centralized, proprietary systems instead of P2P, free systems.
This choice was made with the logic of Capalist, and not Peer
social relations.
When compared to systems of sharing from the earlier generation of
Internet platforms, email, usenet and irc, systems where development
is being systematically neglected in the hope they will die,
imo, what is striking about the new platforms is not the sharing,
which was already happening, but rather the centralization,
propriety, and exclusivity of moderation.
I also endorse Greger's understanding of "sharing cultures" as
"economic systems," and thus must inevitably understand these
developments as a reaction against peer production, not for it,
reasserting capitalist social relations, and thus see these
proprietary platforms as a step backward, not forwards.
Other technologies being systematically neglected because
they promote decentralization are IPV6 and IP Multicasting.
I wonder how crippled the P2P characteristics will become before
the neo-utopian understanding of peer production finally gives
way to a more critical perspective that recognizes that peer
to peer systems are being actively dismantled under our noses,
and that client-server replacements are not to be seen as
progress.
--
Dmytri Kleiner
editing text files since 1981
http://www.telekommunisten.net
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de
--
The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
alternatives.
Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
[2 text/html]
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de