GitHub has no managers among its 140 employees, for example. “Everyone has management interests,” he said. “People can work on things that are interesting to them. Companies should exist to optimize happiness, not money. Profits follow.” He does, however, retain his own title and decides things like salaries.
11More
GitHub Has Big Dreams for Open-Source Software, and More - NYTimes.com - 0 views
-
Another member of GitHub has posted a talk that stresses how companies flourish when people want to work on certain things, not because they are told to.
-
Asana bases work on a series of to-do lists that people assign one another. Inside Asana there are no formal titles, though like GitHub there are bosses at the top who make final decisions.
- ...8 more annotations...
-
For all the happiness and sharing, real money is involved here. In July GitHub received $100 million from the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. This early in most software companies’ lives, $20 million would be a fortune.
-
GitHub’s popularity has also made it an important way for companies to recruit engineers, because some of the best people in the business are showing their work or dissecting the work of others inside some of the public pull requests.
-
Mr. Preston-Werner thinks the way open source requires a high degree of trust and collaboration among relative equals (plus a few high-level managers who define the scope of a job and make final decisions) can be extended more broadly, even into government.
-
“For now this is about code, but we can make the burden of decision-making into an opportunity,” he said. “It would be useful if you could capture the process of decision-making, and see who suggested the decisions that created a law or a bill.”
-
As complex as an open-source project may be, it is also based on a single, well-defined outcome, and an engineering task that is generally free of concepts like fairness and justice, about which people can debate endlessly.
-
Google once prided itself on few managers and fast action, but has found that getting big can also involve lots more meetings.
-
Still, these fast-rising successes may be on to something more than simply universalizing the means of their own good fortune. An early guru of the Information Age, Peter Drucker, wrote often in the latter part of his career of the need for managers to define tasks, and for workers to seek fulfillment before profits.
http://figshare.com/features - 1 views
IFTTT / Put the internet to work for you. - 2 views
1More
Friction is Your Friend: Why Sharing Values isn't always Valuable » Thrivable - 0 views
Guy Kawasaki: The Top 10 Mistakes of Entrepreneurs - YouTube - 1 views
Microfiber transducer - Database - 1 views
5More
shared by Francois Bergeron on 28 Oct 12
- No Cached
Thinking Space: We are in a new transition, part 2 - 3 views
yihongs-research.blogspot.ca/...-in-new-transition-part-2.html
thinking space transition web of minds
![](/images/link.gif)
-
Modern education is a typical effort that people are trying to make a product line of high-quality mind asset.
-
Without explicit, formal presentation of mind asset, we cannot efficiently connect and compose varied mind asset and we cannot well measure the value of mind asset. The issue of mind aggregation is particularly critical because individual mind is often too shallow to be high quality.
-
There is a natural gap between the presented value of the mind asset in the book and the real value of the mind asset in real world. This gap of knowledge understanding is a typical difficulty of mind asset measurement.
- ...1 more annotation...
-
Because of the Web, the first time in history human mind becomes a critical circulating asset in society that ordinary people can buy, sell, produce, and share.
17More
Private 'Distributed Ledgers' Miss the Point of a Blockchain | Bank Think - 0 views
-
Some say it's a tool to enable transparency by ensuring that all members of a group receive cryptographically secured messages about participants’ activities
-
Some are even bold enough to predict that distributed ledgers will end the madness of managing multiple database and reconciliation structures.
- ...13 more annotations...
-
Distributed ledgers have primarily claimed to supplant the need for Bitcoin's mining process by introducing trust requirements among participants. These ledgers also promise users the immutability of Bitcoin without the need for expensive mining operations.
-
Blockchain technology is useful not because it offers efficiency in a world of message-passing but because it uses a complex process to settle value between untrusted parties.
-
But distributed ledgers do not offer users the ability to easily convert their tokens and messages into fungible units of value. Nor do distributed ledgers escrow value between parties that don't trust each other.
-
If a ledger is not a public resource, it will have the pressures incumbent to existing settlement systems plus the overhead of maintaining a shared database among competitors. What efficiency will remain thereafter remains dubious.
-
their institutional users will probably find it expedient to hash their private-chain transactions and use those hashes to create bitcoin addresses and then send tiny fractions of a bitcoin to them to register their data at a location that cannot be hacked or changed.
-
-
In other words, all private ledger/blockchains will lead to Bitcoin's Rome, driven there by its low cost and high public accountability.
Meeting Dashboard - Free Screen Sharing - Online Meetings, Web Conferencing Tools| Free... - 2 views
10More
PeerPoint « Poor Richard's Almanack 2010 - 1 views
-
Each PeerPoint is an autonomous node on a p2p network with no centralized corporate infrastructure.
-
The PeerPoint will be connected between the user’s pc, home network, or mobile device and the ISP connection.
- ...7 more annotations...
-
For numerous reasons the services provided by the commercial companies do not adequately meet the creative, social, political, and financial needs of the 99%
-
With the PeerPoint approach, each user will own her own inexpensive internet appliance and all the data and content she creates
-
If a FreedomBox were used as a starting platform, the PeerPoint application package would be added on top of the FreedomBox security stack.
-
The common requirements for each PeerPoint app are: world class, best-of-breed open source p2p architecture consistent, granular, user-customizable security management and identity protection integrated with other apps in the suite via a common distributed database and/or “data bus” architecture. consistent, user-customizable large, medium, and small-screen (mobile device) user interfaces ability to interface with its corresponding major-market-share service (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) GPS enabled
-
First tier applications: distributed database social networking (comparison of distributed social network applications) trust/reputation metrics crowdsourcing: content collaboration & management (wiki, Google Docs, or better) project management/workflow data visualization (data sets, projects, networks, etc.) user-customizable complementary currency and barter exchange (Community Forge or better) crowd funding (http://www.quora.com/Is-there-an-open-source-crowdfunding-platform) voting (LiquidFeedback or better) universal search across all PeerPoint data/content and world wide web content
Free large file hosting. Send big files the easy way! - 0 views
Drone Project - 0 views
20More
shared by Kurt Laitner on 09 Jan 14
- No Cached
Goodbye, Dilbert: 'The Rise of the Naked Economy' » Knowledge@Wharton - 2 views
knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/...bye-dilbert-rise-naked-economy
sensorica the rise of the naked economy book review
![](/images/link.gif)
-
The old cubicle-based, static company is increasingly being replaced by a more fluid and mobile model: “the constant assembly, disassembly, and reassembly of people, talent, and ideas around a range of challenges and opportunities.”
-
Therefore, the new economy and its “seminomadic workforce” will require “new places to gather, work, live, and interact.”
- ...17 more annotations...
-
The consumer electronics company Plantronics, for example, knowing that on any given day 40% of its workforce will be working elsewhere, designed its corporate campus to only 60% capacity
-
Their joint enterprise, NextSpace, became their first venture into what they call “coworking,” or the creation of “shared collaborative workspaces.”
-
also nurtures what the authors call “managed serendipity” — ad hoc collaboration between people with diverging but complementary skills
-
Coonerty and Neuner found that the most productive collaborations tended to pair highly specialized experts with big-picture thinkers
-
Clients get the specialized help they need at a cost below that of a full-time employee or traditional consulting firm, and specialists are well compensated and rewarded with flexible schedules and a greater degree of choice about which projects to take.
-
This has produced a new market dynamic in which the headhunter of yesteryear has been replaced by “talent brokers” who connect highly specialized talent with companies on a project-by-project basis
-
Matthew Mullenweg, doesn’t have much faith in traditional office buildings or corporate campuses: “I would argue that most offices are full of people not working.”
-
On the other hand, Mullenweg is a big believer in face-to-face collaboration and brainstorming, and flies his teams all over the globe to do so.
-
Additionally, a 2010 Kauffman-Rand study worried that employer-based health insurance, by discouraging risk-taking, will be an ongoing drag on entrepreneurship
22More
Value Accounting System - P2P Foundation - 0 views
-
are not exchanging anything among themselves
-
A value creation process that requires more than one individual can be based on following 3 arrangements
- ...16 more annotations...
-
All labor is transferred into fluid equity through a value accounting system, which grants ownership to the participant member to a percentage of the future revenue generated for the lifetime of the product created
-
based on contributions
-
horizontal governance system
30More
shared by Kurt Laitner on 31 Jan 14
- Cached
UK Indymedia - WOS4: The Creative Anti-Commons and the Poverty of Networks - 0 views
www.indymedia.org.uk/...350884.html
@ukindymedia commons free material vs immaterial exchange value use value rival goods non-rival goods
![](/images/link.gif)
-
Further, unless it can be converted into exchange-value, how can the peer producers be able to acquire the material needs for their own subsistence?
-
For Social Production to have any effect on general material wealth it has to operate within the context of a total system of goods and services, where the physical means of production and the virtual means of production are both available in the commons for peer production.
- ...26 more annotations...
-
"All texts published in Situationist International may be freely reproduced, translated and edited, even without crediting the original source."
-
The website of the creative commons makes the following statement about it's purpose: "Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright -- all rights reserved -- and the public domain -- no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work -- a 'some rights reserved' copyright."
-
The website of the creative commons makes the following statement about it's purpose: "Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright -- all rights reserved -- and the public domain -- no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work -- a 'some rights reserved' copyright."
-
Or more specifically, who is a position to convert the use-value available in the "commons" into the exchange-value needed to acquire essential subsistence or accumulate wealth?
-
All texts published in Situationist International may be freely reproduced, translated and edited, even without crediting the original source
-
The point of the above is clear, the Creative Commons, is to help "you" (the "Producer") to keep control of "your" work. The right of the "consumer" is not mentioned, neither is the division of "producer" and "consumer" disputed.
-
Creative "Commons" is thus really an Anti-Commons, serving to legitimise, rather than deny, Producer-control and serving to enforce, rather than do away with, the distinction between producer and consumer
-
specifically providing a framework then, for "producers" to deny "consumers" the right to either create use-value or material exchange-value of the "common" stock of value in the Creative "Commons" in their own cultural production
-
Thus, the very problem presented by Lawrence Lessig, the problem of Producer-control, is not in anyway solved by the presented solution, the Creative Commons, so long as the producer has the exclusive right to chose the level of freedom to grant the consumer, a right which Lessig has always maintained support for
-
The Free Software foundation, publishers of the GPL, take a very different approach in their definition of "free," insisting on the "four freedoms:" The Freedom to use, the freedom to study, the freedom to share, and the freedom to modify.
-
The website of the creative commons makes the following statement about it's purpose: "Creative Commons defines the spectrum of possibilities between full copyright -- all rights reserved -- and the public domain -- no rights reserved. Our licenses help you keep your copyright while inviting certain uses of your work -- a 'some rights reserved' copyright
-
In all these cases what is evident is that the freedom being insisted upon is the freedom of the consumer to use and produce, not the "freedom" of the producer to control.
-
Moreover, proponents of free cultural must be firm in denying the right of Producer-control and denying the enforcement of distinction between producer and consumer
-
where a class-less community of workers ("peers") produce collaboratively within a property-less ("commons-based") society
-
However, if commons-based peer-production is limited exclusively to a commons made of digital property with virtual no reproduction costs then how can the use-value produced be translated into exchange-value?
-
Further, unless it can be converted into exchange-value, how can the peer producers be able to acquire the material needs for their own subsistence
-
The source of poverty is not reproduction costs, but rather extracted economic rents, forcing the producers to accept less than the full product of their labour as their wage by denying them independent access to the means of production
-
So long as commons-based peer-production is applied narrowly to only an information commons, while the capitalist mode of production still dominates the production of material wealth, owners of material property, namely land and capital, will continue to capture the marginal wealth created as a result of the productivity of the information commons.
-
Whatever exchange value is derived from the information commons will always be captured by owners of real property, which lays outside the commons.
-
For Social Production to have any effect on general material wealth it has to operate within the context of a total system of goods and services, where the physical means of production and the virtual means of production are both available in the commons for peer production
-
For free cultural to create a valuable common stock it must destroy the privilege of the producer to control the common stock, and for this common stock to increase the real material wealth of peer producers, the commons must include real property, not just information
-
Strong grasp of the issues, not entirely in agreement on the thesis that the solution is the removal of producer control as this does not support the initiation of an economy, only its ongoing function once established, and the economy is continuously intiating itself, so it is not a one time problem. I do support the notion that producers are in fact none other than consumers of prior art but also that effort is required to remix as much as the magical creation out of nothing. In order to incent this behavior then (or even merely to allow it) the basic scarce needs of the individual must be taken care of. This may be done by ensuring beneficial ownership, but even that suffers from the initiation problem, which the requires us to have a pool of wealth to kickstart the thing by supporting every last person on earth with a basic income - that wealth is in fact available...
38More
The Energy Efficiency of Trust & Vulnerability: A Conversation | Switch and Shift - 0 views
- ...34 more annotations...
-
When we don’t trust, we exert a lot of energy to keep up our guard, to continually assess and verify. This uses a lot of energy and time.
-
As we let ourselves be vulnerable, we also leave ourselves more open to new ideas, new ways of thinking which leads to empathy and innovation.
-
It lets us reallocate our resources to what matters and utilize our skills and those around us to increase effectiveness…impact.
-
If we are working together, we need to agree on the meaning of ‘done’. When are we done, what does that look like?
-
As the ability to replicate something has become more of a commodity, we are increasingly seeing that complex interactions are the way to create ‘value from difference’ (as opposed to ‘value from sameness’).
-
Efficient systems are great at dealing with complicated things – things that have many parts and sequences, but they fall flat dealing with complex systems, which is most of world today.
-
When we never do the same thing or have the same conversation twice, it becomes much more important to figure out why and what we do than how we do it (process, which is a given)
1More
shared by Kurt Laitner on 30 Jan 14
- No Cached
The World of Social Objects - 0 views
www.slideshare.net/...the-world-of-social-objects
X as social object social objects shared social objects
![](/images/link.gif)
6More
Digital Agenda for Europe - European Commission - 0 views
-
he challenges faced in Europe and beyond are too large to tackle in isolation and thus a new approach to innovation is required
- ...3 more annotations...
-
creative destruction model where the failure of old approaches fuels the motivation for change and shapes the future
-
quadruple helix model of innovation where civil society joins with business, academia, and government sectors to drive changes far beyond the scope of what any one organization can do on their own.