How Peer to Peer Communities will change the World - 0 views
-
role of p2p movement
-
historical role
-
horizontalisation of human relationships
- ...55 more annotations...
-
allowing the free aggregation of individuals around shared values or common value creation
-
a huge sociological shift
-
new life forms, social practices and human institutions
-
emergent communities of practice are developing new social practices that are informed by the p2p paradigm
-
ethical revolution
-
openness
-
participation
-
inclusivity
-
cooperation
-
commons
-
the open content industry in the U.S. to reach one sixth of GDP.
-
political expressions
-
the movement has two wings
-
constructive
-
building new tools and practices
-
resistance to neoliberalism
-
we are at a stage of emergence
-
difficulty of implementing full p2p solutions in the current dominant system
-
At this stage, there is a co-dependency between peer producers creating value, and for-profit firms ‘capturing that value’, but they both need each other.
-
Peer producers need a business ecology to insure the social reproduction of their system and financial sustainability of its participants, and capital needs the positive externalities of social cooperation which flow from p2p collaboration.
-
peer producing communities should create their own ‘mission-oriented’ social businesses, so that the surplus value remains with the value creators, i.e. the commoners themselves, but this is hardly happening now.
-
Instead what we see is a mutual accomodation between netarchical capital on one side, and peer production communities on the other.
-
the horizontal meets the vertical
-
mostly hybrid ‘diagonal’ adaptations
-
For peer producers the question becomes, if we cannot create our own fully autonomous institutions, how can we adapt while maintaining maximum autonomy and sustainability as a commons and as a community.
-
Why p2p have failed to create successful alternatives in some areas?
-
In commons-oriented peer production, where people aggegrate around a common object which requires deep cooperation, they usually have their own infrastructures of cooperation and a ecology combining community, a for-benefit association managing the infrastructure, and for-profit companies operating on the market place; in the sharing economy, where individuals merely share their own expressions, third party platforms are the norm. It is clear that for-profit companies have different priorities, and want to enclose value so that it can be sold on the marketplace. This in fact the class struggle of the p2p era, the struggle between communities and corporations around various issues because of partly differential interests.
-
Even commercially controlled platforms are being used for a massive horizontalisation and self-aggregation of human relationships, and communities, including political and radical groups are effectively using them to mobilize. What’s important is not just to focus on the limitations and intentions of the platform owners, but to use whatever we can to strengthen the autonomy of peer communities.
-
requires a clever adaptation
-
use for our own benefit
-
The fact today is that capital is still capable of marshaling vast financial and material resources, so that it can create,
-
platforms that can easily and quickly offer services, creating network effects
-
without network effects, there is no ‘there’ there, just an empty potential platform.
-
p2p activists should work on both fronts
-
using mainstream platforms for spreading their ideas and culture and reach greater numbers of people, while also developing their own autonomous media ecologies, that can operate independently, and the latter is an engagement for the ‘long haul’, i.e. the slow construction of an alternative lifeworld.
-
The commons and p2p are really just different aspects of the same phenomena; the commons is the object that p2p dynamics are building; and p2p takes place wherever there are commons.
-
So both p2p and the commons, as they create abundant (digital) or sufficient (material) value for the commoners, at the same time create opportunities to create added value for the marketplace. There is no domain that is excluded from p2p, no field that can say, “we wouldn’t be stronger by opening up to participation and community dynamics”. And there is no p2p community that can say, we are in the long term fully sustainable within the present system, without extra resources coming from the market sector.
-
One trend is the distribution of current infrastructures and practices, i.e. introducing crowdsourcing, crowdfunding, social lending, digital currencies, in order to achieve wider participation in current practices. That is a good thing, but not sufficient. All the things that I mention above, move to a distributed infrastructure, but do not change the fundamental logic of what they are doing.
-
we are talking about the distribution of capitalism, not about a deeper change in the logic of our economy.
-
No matter how good you are, no matter how much capital you have to hire the best people, you cannot compete with the innovative potential of open global communities.
-
the p2p dynamics
-
the new networked culture
-
the opposite is also happening, as we outlined above, more and more commons-oriented value communities are creating their own entrepreneurial coalitions. Of course, some type of companies, because of their monopoly positions and legacy systems, may have a very difficult time undergoing that adaptation, in which case new players will appear that can do it more effectively.
-
the corporate form is unable to deal with ecological and sustainability issues, because its very DNA, the legal obligation to enrich the shareholders, makes its strive to lower input costs, and ignore externalities.
-
we need new corporate structures, a new type of market entity, for which profit is a means, but not an end, dedicated to a ‘benefit‘, a ‘mission’, or the sustenance of a particular community and/or commons.
-
abundance destroys scarcity and therefore markets
-
open design community
-
will inherently design for sustainability
-
for inclusion
-
conceive more distributed forms of manufacturing
-
entrepreneurs attaching themselves to open design projects start working from an entirely different space, even if they still use the classic corporate form. Prevent the sharing of sustainability designs through IP monopolies is also in my view unethical and allowing such patents should be a minimalist option, not a maximalist one.
-
The high road scenario proposes an enlightened government that ‘enables and empowers’ social production and value creation and allows a much smoother transition to p2p models; the low road scenario is one in which no structural reforms take place, the global situation descends into various forms of chaos, and p2p becomes a survival and resilience tactic in extremely difficult social, political and economic circumstances.
-
accelerated end of capitalism
-
Making sure that we get a better alternative is actually the historical task of the p2p movement. In other words, it depends on us!
-
I don’t really think in terms of technological breakthroughs, because the essential one, globally networked collective intelligence enabled by the internetworks, is already behind us; that is the major change, all other technological breakthroughs will be informed by this new social reality of the horizontalisation of our civilisation. The important thing now is to defend and extend our communication and organisation rights, against a concerted attempt to turn back the clock. While the latter is really an impossibility, this does not mean that the attempts by governments and large corporations cannot create great harm and difficulties. We need p2p technology to enable the global solution finding and implementation of the systemic crises we are facing.
