Re: modeling shares of benefits (ex. electricity in a grid, trips on common transit etc.)

Excerpts from Patrick Anderson's message of 2012-08-30 17:21:42 +0000:
> ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote:
> > describe various digital artefacts which you see
> > helpful in implementing it
> The digital artefacts are I think of two types, which
> I will describe as though they are printed on paper.
> 
> 
> The first is the GNUrho Insurance Title which defines
> the physical assets and labor required to reproduce
> more of some good or service.
> 
> For example, if a group were to co-own a bus for their
> own benefit, they would each receive as many GNUrho
> Titles as they invested to buy that vehicle.
> 
> The GNUrho would be issued by the group and be used
> to 'pay' the crowd-funding investors who expect to get
> Product as their ROI.
> 
> GNUrho are 'invalid' unless the "Labor" portion has
> promises from skilled artisans to perform the various
> work (operation, maintenance, inspection, etc.).
hmmmm... this GNUrho sounds somehow like what i refer to as *fictional monetary currency* nowadays including USD/EURO & co. Bitcoin, LETS etc.
but it doens't matter on technical side since we aim for technologies which support them as well!

from my perspective, in sane environment people manufacture, maintain and drive buses because they care that they and other people in community can commute. if we create graph of dependency of all the resources and services required to provide a bus, i find it quite straight forward that all the contributors from making steel, then parts, transporting it, assembling, cooking food in factories participating in production, fixing buses and driving them, all might like to have their shares of *bus trips* from the pool made possible by capacity of this bus.

by sticking to the actual benefit of this very involved collaborative process: *bus trips* and sharing it among all contributors, we don't introduce any fictional artifact as in monetary currencies :)

personally i want to focus on those variants which don't introduce such fictional tokens, but once more technologies we work on here should also make possible for people who want to use some fictional monetary artifact among themselves to do so.

> The second is a booklet of "Use Tokens" that each
> represent some reasonable granularity of the Product,
> such as "One Day Bus Pass" or maybe "One Mile
> Bus Service" or "One Hour ...", etc.

yes! such *use tokens* which i often refer to as *access tokens* to some resources (which can include goods ex. food or services - ex. transportation)

> 
> > as well as activities of
> > various parties involved. With emphasis of clear
> > individual and collective identities etc.
> 
> Are you asking how the work will be done?
> 
> The approach is related to Time Banking and a
> small part of barter.
> 
> What I noticed is that we don't really need to trade
> Products if they are already in the correct hands
> (In other words, the co-owner of a bus does not
> buy bus rides, but owns those rides already as a
> side-effect of co-owing the bus).
> 
> But we do need to trade (barter) Skills so that we
> can have voluntary specialization and the efficiency
> it brings.
> 
> And so workers will Swap Skills *before* production
> begins (signing-up on a bulletin-board that lists all
> the work that we need done within our VIPM).
VIPM?

> 
> For example, I might commit to drive the bus and
> shovel manure and work in the dairy in return for
> other people committing to harvest pecans and
> fix my teeth and tend the bees, etc.
with such commitments, i look for a formal way of expressing various dependencies, possibly using Linked Data
in your example i would like to have option of stating:

i need pecans and honey so i can drive a bus
honey need someone tending  bees
pecans need someone to pick them

allowing such reasoning:
if i would like this person to help with driving a bus
i need to help with tending bees or harvesting pecans

> 
> The commitments on this bulletin-board allow us
> to trade the "picking of apples" with the "picking of
> oranges" without ever needing to trade apples and
> oranges directly.

ok, here we would need a digital artifact representing:

"picking apples" with possible attributes like: location, date, duration, kind of apples, weight etc.

of course people can choose to do it in less formal and precise way but i think that technologies we work on should allow a whole spectrum between strict and liberal notations.

Received on Thursday, 30 August 2012 18:19:37 UTC