W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > March 2013

Re: A Distributed Economy -- A blog involving Linked Data

From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 01:17:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CACvcBVogZZK1afBzi2hpetmP_wwmBjuAv1QMNgV9uEX+kPREuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>
Cc: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com>, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose@gmail.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>, Paul Cockshott <william.cockshott@glasgow.ac.uk>
Hello Everyone,

Sometimes I get upset and afraid. I know I am missing a lot, and it is
difficult for me to comprehend what is going on in the world. I'm happy
that everyone is here.


On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Brent Shambaugh

> In an attempt to understand the conversation we had, I was sent in a
> flurry of confusion. I started checking out books, and one was Resilience
> by Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy. I found a few quotes that seem
> exciting to me:
> "Adhocracies thrive on data. And by the stroke of fantastic luck, we're
> currently witnessing the global birth of an adhocracy of data -- a global
> revolution that, for the first time, empowers orgranizations with the
> capacity to collect and correlate widely distributed real-time information
> about the way many critical systems are performing. This kind of open data
> will play a central role in resilience strategies for years to come." pg.
> 266, Resilience, Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy
> "And for organizations of all types there is a powerful lesson here:
> Resilience benefits accrue to organizations that prioritize the collection,
> presentation, and sharing of data." pg. 269, Resilience, Andrew Zolli and
> Ann Marie Healy
> "A related theme in the resilience discussion is the importance of
> networks, which provide a universal, abstract reference system for
> describing how information, resources, and behaviours flow through many
> complex systems. Having a common means to describe biological, economic,
> and ecological systems, for example, allows researchers to make comparisons
> between the ways these very different kinds of entities approach similar
> problems, such as stopping a contagion - whether an actual virus, a
> financial panic, an unwanted behavior, or an environmental contaminant -
> when it begins to spread. Having a shared frame of reference allows us to
> consider how successful tactics in one domain might be applied to another -
> as we'll see in newly emerging fields like ecological finance." pg 19,
> Resilience, Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy
> "Rather the resilience frame suggests a different, complementary effort to
> mitigation: to redesign our institutions, embolden our communities,
> encourage innovation and experimentation, and support our people in ways
> that will help them be prepared and cope with surprises and distruptions,
> even as we work to fend them off." pg 23, Resilience, Andrew Zolli and Ann
> Marie Healy
> It is interesting that Buckminster Fuller wrote about similar ideas over
> 30 years ago:
> "The inefficiency of automobiles' reciprocating engines - and their
> traffic-system-wasted fuel - and the energy inefficiency of today's
> buildings, are only two of hundreds of thousands of instances that can be
> cited of the design-avoidable energy wastage. But the technical raison
> d'etre for either the energy-effectiveness gains or losses is all
> completely invisible to human eyes. Thus, the significance of their
> omni-integratable potentialities is uncomprehended by either the world's
> leaders or the led.
> Neither the great political and financial power structures of the world,
> nor the specialization-blinded professionals, nor the population in general
> realize the sum-totally the omni-engineering-integratable, invisible
> revolution in metallurgical, chemical, and electronic arts now makes it
> possible to do so much more with ever fewer pounds and volumes of material,
> ergs of energy, and seconds of time per given technological function that
> it is now highly feasible to take care of everybody on Earth at a "higher
> standard of living than any have ever known.", pg. xxv, Critical Path, R.
> Buckminster Fuller
> "World Game will become increasingly effective in its prognoses and
> programming when the world-around, satellite-interrelayed computer system
> and its omni-Universe-operative (time-energy) accounting system are
> established. This system will identify the kilowatt-hour-expressed world
> inventory of foods, raw and recirculating resources, and all the world's
> unique mechanical and structural capabilities and their operating
> capacities as well  as the respective kilowatt-hours of available
> energy-income-derived operating power with which to put their facilities to
> work. All the foregoing information will become available in respect to all
> the world-around technology's environment-controlling, life-sustaining,
> travel- and communication-accomidating structures and machines.", pg. 219,
> Critical Path, R. Buckminster Fuller
> I'm happy that Milton Ponson pointed out Resilience. I had never thought
> about resilience before. Looking into it was very gratifying. It gave me
> some confidence that I was perhaps doing some things right, but at the same
> time startled me by how much there is to learn to somehow survive the free
> fall. Doing a search for Linked Data and Resilience gave me a result from
> rkbexpolorer (
> http://www.rkbexplorer.com/explorer/#display=project-{http%3A//wiki.rkbexplorer.com/id/resist}<http://www.rkbexplorer.com/explorer/#display=project-%7Bhttp%3A//wiki.rkbexplorer.com/id/resist%7D>)
> which is from the ReSIST (Resilience for Survivability) project in Europe (
> http://www.resist-noe.org/). They also have some links to some free
> course material at <http://resist.isti.cnr.it/home.php>.
> I believe my blog evolved to explore a peer-to-peer economy. Michael
> Bauwens desribes such economies as distributed networks, "As political,
> economic, and social systems transform themselves into distributed
> networks, a new human dynamic is emerging: peer to peer (P2P). As P2P gives
> rise to the emergence of a third mode of production, a third mode of
> governence, and a third mode of property, it is poised to overhaul our
> political economy in unprecendented ways." (
> www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499)
> This suggests something broader. As a result of our conversation, I also
> looked at some people with socialist views such as Roberto Verzola, W. Paul
> Cockshott and Allin Cottrell, Raoul Viktor, and Heinz Dieterich.
> Roberto Verzola describes an economy of abundance, which may indeed be
> linked to P2P technologies.
> "An economy of abundance seeks to dismantle or reform these
> scarcity-generating institutions in such a way as to affirm our freedom to
> live life as art (self-expression to others), social equity (so that
> everything can live life as art), and sustainability (so that all life can
> thrive into the future). Among other things, this implies a much greater
> role for various forms of shared property, individual an community-level
> self-reliance, and participatory decision making." (
> http://www.shareable.net/blog/event-the-economics-of-abundance)
> He also argues that for innovation to proceed, everyone seeking knowledge
> should have access to it.
> "the most important means to ensure that innovation can proceed is to
> ensure that everyone seeking knowledge has access to it. ... Knowledge that
> helps empower people depends on openness, while knowledge that is used to
> coerce, to exert power over the disempowered, thrives on secrecy" p. 150,
> The Economics of Abunance: A Political Economy of Freedom, Equity and
> Sustainability, Roberto Verzola
> This seems to align well with my present feelings.
> I feel that engineering is so saturated with IP, that it is hard to feel
> like you're not going to be doing that. At the same time I want to develop
> my skills and thrive. How do become a Professional Engineer and not feel
> like you're going to be doing that? What if you don't like the lawyer
> saturated culture where people are suing other people over some idea you or
> someone else produced? I can sense that a lot of people, especially in the
> hacker and maker community, want to be able to support themselves and work
> on cool new things but don't want to deny other people to work on the same
> cool things. Why do ideas have to take on a life of their own and become
> part of something you might be employed by, but have no control beyond
> that? Sorry about the extreme language, but why do I imagine it as making
> deal with the devil? Betraying your friends so you can enjoy life and eat?
> In this, there is an underlying assumption that there are institutions that
> do not want to share or partner, or make it very difficult. If it is
> easier, I feel that could be better.
> Buckminster Fuller also wrote about such things:
> "2. Grandmother taught us the Golden Rule: "Love thy neighbor as thy
> self--do unto others as you would they should do unto you.
> 3. As we became older and more experienced, out uncles began to caution us
> to get over our sensitivity. "Life is hard," they explained. 'There is
> nowhere nearly enough life support for everybody on our planet, let alone
> enough for a comfortable life support. If you want to raise a family and
> have a comfortable life for them, you are going to have to deprive many
> others of the opportunity to survive and the sooner, the better. Your
> grandmother's Golden Rule is beautiful, but it doesn't work.'" p. 123.
> Critical Path, R. Buckminster Fuller
> Is it possible to have a win-win between people an business? Are there any
> financial barriers to entry and/or partnership? Sometimes I fear that I
> will never be paid enough to implement my ideas, or if I do then it will be
> too late to enter the market. Either I can't afford to do the work, or
> someone who developed and patented something that matches at least some of
> my idea decides not to involve me. Thus I would question spending the time
> developing my idea. I'm assuming I can develop my idea for my own personal
> use (possibly not?). However, I am more certain I may have trouble sharing
> and selling things developed from my ideas. I imagine that this favors
> those who already have money.
> People like Eric von Hippel and Michael Bauwens both speak about a lot of
> innovation goinf on outside the firm. For example Michel Bauwen's states:
> "The French-Italian school of 'cognitive capitalism' stresses the value
> creation today is no longer confined to the enterprise, but beholden to the
> mass intellectuality of
> knowledge workers, who through their lifelong learning/experiencing and
> systematic connectivity, constantly innovate within and without the
> enterprise. This is an important
> argument, since it would justify what we see as the only solution for the
> expansion of the P2P sphere into a society at large: the universal basic
> income. Only the
> independence of work and the salary structure can guarantee the peer
> producers can continue to create this sphere of highly productive use
> value."
> The Political Economy of Peer Production (
> www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499)
> Eric von Hippel also speaks about his book. (
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20060123-Eric.von.Hippel-Democratizing.Innovation.ogg
> )
> However, giving people money for doing nothing makes me feel
> uncomfortable. Of course, as Heinz Dietrich suggests, if you already have
> money, things work just fine:
> "The first step, in fact, would be to establish a new cybernetic
> principle; you need something that coordinates billions of economic
> transactions everyday. And, so far, the market has been a relatively
> well-functioning system under two conditions: If the market is not
> monopolistic and you have the buying power for the merchandise you produce
> and for the services, then the market coordinates quite well."-- The
> Socialism of the 21st Century (
> http://eipcp.net/transversal/0805/dieterich/en)
> Paul Cockshott, and Allin Cottrell suggest a payment system determined
> democratically, "The payment system outlined in chapter 2 depends on the
> idea that the total labour content of each product or service can be
> calculated." p. 8, Towards a New Socialism
> If this is by the state, then I am moved to say I do not trust the
> government to do much right at all. Certainly, this is what I feel if I
> spend any length of time watching the news. But I would like to look into
> it. If this develops into something, the state should be involved at some
> level. I feel bad about this. I'll have to read more.
> However, I agree that with more democracy things would be better.
> "The principal bases for a post-Soviet socialism must be radical democracy
> and efficient planning. The democratic element, it is now clear, is not a
> luxury,
> or something that can be postponed until conditions are especially
> favourable. Without democracy, as we have argued above, the leaders of a
> socialist society
> will be driven to coercion in order to ensure the production of a surplus
> product, and if coercion slackens the system will tend to stagnate." p. 7,
> Towards a New Socialism
> I definately think there needs to be some way to accomplish things that
> makes it fair to people. In terms of me, I believe this underlies a larger
> problem than me being connected with the right job or being afraid of debt
> going back to school. It is the problem of connecting people with the right
> jobs,
> utilizing the skills they already have so they don't have to fear paying
> to learn what they already know, and raising awareness that the jobs are
> there. I dream about linked data being able to illuminate relationships
> between present skills and related skills to job seekers and employers. I
> also dream about linked data allowing people to market themselves with
> clarity as a basket of skills that represents who they really are rather
> than a basket of skills that was set by a well-meaning college,
> trade-school, or university. I honestly believe that people who do
> something they have a passion for, will be more effective employees or
> entrepreneurs.
> But how to pay for it? If you take out debt you need to find a way to pay
> it off. If you can't find something that reflects your values you may feel
> like you're enslaved to something else while trying to pay it off. It can
> be a pressing struggle as Paul Grignon's Money as Debt video on Youtube
> describes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K5_JE_gOys). Paul Grigon and
> others say that our present monetary system leads to infinite growth.
> "We need to become politically sensitive to the invisible architectures of
> power. In distributed systems, where there is no overt hierarchy, power is
> a function of design. One such system, perhaps the most important of all,
> is the monetary system, whose interest-bearing design requires the market
> to be linked to a system of infinite growth, and this link needs to be
> broken.
> A global reform of the monetary system, or the spread of new means of
> direct social production of money, are the necessary conditions for such a
> break."
> (http://p2pfoundation.net/About_The_Foundation)
> I'd imagine this would create no problems for people as long as there is
> the will and resources to grow infinitely. However, Paul Grigon points out
> an exception: those with the money to lend at interest will eventually wind
> up with all of the money, and due to forclosure the property too.
> My site explores distributed funding. (
> http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com/2012/03/distributed-funding.html).
> I am still not sure how exactly to accomplish it. I think it may involve
> something like Ripple (https://classic.ripplepay.com/) and PaySwarm (
> http://payswarm.com/). A friend of mine pointed out that it did not seem
> that Ripple allows to keep track of what you owe who, whereas PaySwarm
> appears to do so. I may need to develop something on my own (
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments/2013Feb/0034.html)
> that involes donations, and whatever models are needed. Embarrasingly, I'm
> still learning JavaScript. Thankfully, my friends are also encouraging me
> to focus on some small project.
> A few other thoughts:
> As I was reading, I noticed some mention of rival and non-rival goods.
> Rival goods could be seen as raw materials or products, and non-rival goods
> could exist in an infinite amount. In the
> maker world I see things such as CAD files as non-rival and raw materials
> and end products as rival. I question whether people would still pay for
> rival goods, and perhaps donate for non-rival goods if there was an open
> source economy? What if things such as PaySwarm made it easy to do so?
> The Rep Rap and Ardrino are open source hardware, and all products by
> Makerbot used to be (http://josefprusa.cz/open-hardware-meaning/,
> http://www.hoektronics.com/2012/09/21/makerbot-and-open-source-a-founder-perspective/).
> People can share their designs, but would people share their profits with
> those who contributed to their idea? It wouldn't have to be much, as small
> amounts still add up. Would this be bad? Even if people don't have to pay,
> things might still vary as does the amount you might get by selling a book?
> Concieveably if you have a lot of open source hardware, then you could have
> as much flexibility in the physical world as you do in the software world.
> In an extreme case, maybe you could have open source spaceships. They are
> after all lots of little parts, much like a GNU/Linux distro.
> If things could be freely copied and not exclusively owned as in the GPL,
> would you still have brand loyalty? While not going into the fine details,
> the Ultimaker and the Makerbot Thing-O-Matic look very similar. Why would I
> want one over the other? If whatever you chose was linked to previous
> innovations, and people let their donations flow to those authors, how much
> would it matter?
> Would the crowd maintain accountability so people would not collect money
> for doing nothing? The maker community seems to be supportive of things
> that they are free to contribute to. How far could this go, especially with
> support from arguments made by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams in the
> book Wikinomics? For the legality, things like the JOBs act seem exciting.
> However, this seems to be for equity-based crowdfunding and not just
> donations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JOBS_Act). I'd imagine that it
> would be both even if some of the things were as described above. What if
> you were retired, and you had money, but nothing you contributed was being
> used? Could you grow your money to support yourself?
> The potential of digital technologies seems huge. I read about the
> Industrial Internet, as pointed out by Milton Poson. The GE report titled,
> "Industrial Internet. Pushing the Boundaries of Minds and Machines"<
> www.ge.com/docs/chapters/Industrial_Internet.pdf>, by Peter C. Evans and
> Marco Annunziata has the following quote:
> "The combination of physics- based approaches, deep sector specific domain
> expertise, more automation of information flows, and predictive
> capabilities can join with the existing
> suite of “big data” tools. The result is the Industrial Internet
> encompasses traditional approaches with newer hybrid approaches that can
> leverage the power of both historic and
> real-time data with industry specific advanced analytics."
> Of course, this makes me want to go down the path of Density Functional
> Theory and Molecular Dynamics. I had a brief exposure to these concepts in
> graduate school, and it reminds me of the layout algorithms in Gephi (at
> least MD, I know a little less about DFT). Yes! I just learned about DBSCAN
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBSCAN) in R (
> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~dq209/others/Rdatamining.pdf) and ELKI (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELKI). And here you have it, the original
> DBSCAN paper
> (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=
> In addition, they speak about Enterprise Management Software in terms of
> the Industrial Internet:
> "At the other end of the spectrum, enterprise management software and
> solutions have been widely adopted to drive organizational efficiencies at
> the firm level. The benefits
> of these efforts include better tracking and coordination of labor, supply
> chain, quality, compliance, and sales and distribution across broad
> geographies and product lines.
> However, these efforts have sometimes fallen short because while they can
> passively track asset operations at the product level, the ability to
> impact asset performance is limited.
> Optimizing the system to maximize asset and enterprise performance is what
> the Industrial Internet offers."
> This reminds me of a presentation given by Dr. Manoj Dharwadkar of Bentley
> Systems Inc. titled, "Using Sematic Web Technologies in Open Applications" (
> http://www.w3.org/2008/12/ogws-slides/Bentley.pdf). It also reminds me of
> the The Simantics Platform at the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland (
> www.vtt.fi) and the mission of Dassault Systems (www.3ds.com). They all
> have the ISO15926 ontology in common.
> I wasn't sure if they were talking about linked data in the report:
> "To make information intelligent, new connections need to be developed so
> that Big Data ‘knows’ when and where it needs to go, and how to get there.
> If imaging data is better
> connected, the right doctor could automatically receive a patient’s
> rendered images so the information is finding the doctor instead of the
> doctor
> finding the information. "  --- Opportunity for Liked Data?
> random paper with medical devices communicating with the semantic web:
> http://radiographics.rsna.org/content/30/7/2039.abstract
> http://www.mdpnp.org/uploads/8-3_Schluter_26Jan.pdf (devices
> commmunicating, like Industrial Internet)
> Further, they go into what is needed to to build the Industrial Internet:
> "The Industrial Internet will require an adequate backbone. Data centers,
> broadband spectrum, and fiber networks are all components of the ICT
> infrastructure
> that will need to be further developed to connect the various machines,
> systems, and networks across industries and geographies.
> This will require a combination of inter- and intra- state infrastructure
> order to support the significant growth in data flows involved with the
> Industrial Internet.
> "
> I heard that Oklahoma, and the U.S. in general, needs more fiber. Someone
> said that Denver, Dallas, Kansas City, Silicon Valley, Austin(?), all have
> good networks.
> How would the talent to build the Industrial Internet be gathered? Here
> are a few more quotes:
> "Other alternatives for sourcing cross-discipline talent might include
> developing the existing resources in the native domain through
> collaborative approaches. Instead
> of building or buying talent that has multiple skills, create environments
> that accelerate the ability of people with different skills to interact and
> innovate together.
> On a larger scale, approaches such as crowdsourcing might be able to close
> some of the capabilities gaps that are sure to occur."
> "Today, the people that manage big data systems or perform advanced
> analytics have developed unique talents through self-driven specialization,
> rather than through
> any programs that build a standard set of skills or principles.
> Co-development of curriculum, integration of academic staff into industry,
> and other approaches will be
> needed to ensure that the talent needs of the Industrial Internet do not
> outpace the educational system."
> There definately is a lag between the development of IT, and its adoption.
> In Chemical Engineering, I'm pretty sure people thought I was crazy when I
> started talking about the Semantic Web. People in network security, and
> even computer science were not familiar with it. If you're talking about
> Wikinomics (Openness, Peering, Sharing, Acting Global) thinking there might
> be some growth to do. I heard of people at universities and hackerspaces
> speak of themselves as universities, but their culture is very different.
> Maybe hackerspaces are on the extreme of being open, whereas universities
> are less so? Maybe this is the case with IP. Maybe less so, with papers
> (but who can access them?).
> See a presentation in 2008 by RIC Jackson, then Director of the FIATECH
> Consortium: (
> http://www.slccc.net/documents_pdf/Technology-Ric%20Jackson%200811.pdf).
> Adoption of new tech for the enterprise is slow:
> (
> http://pandodaily.com/2012/02/11/why-oracle-may-really-be-doomed-this-time/
> ).
> There are some, such as the Mayor of Newark, NJ, who bothered to go to
> SXSW to speak about the adoption of more tech:
> (
> http://pandodaily.com/2013/03/10/cory-booker-calls-for-tech-empowered-open-democracy/
> ).
> Here are three more quotes from the report:
> "Measures to ensure the security of restricted data, including
> intellectual property,proprietary information, and personally identifiable
> information (PII) are critical.
> " --- this reminds me of the Read Write Web Community Group
> "Currently there are several standards bodies, but they are fragmented.
> The promotion and adoption of common and consistent standards on data
> structure, encryption,
> transfer mechanisms, and the proper use of data will go a long way in
> advancing cyber security."
> I was made fun of by a CS graduate when I was excited about a possible new
> standard.
> "Academia: Further research on data security and privacy should be
> pursued, including research on enhancing IT security, metrology,
> inferencing concerns with non-
> sensitive data, and legal foundations for privacy in data aggregation."
> Perhaps more collaboration with the hacker community? Is it true that some
> programmers, and some in CS tend to build things and ignore security in the
> process? I wonder what is going on at hacker conferences like Blackhat and
> DEFCON. BTW, people at the Chaos Communication Congress are geniuses.
> Whew! That's enough. If you're interested in more, read the report. It's
> exciting. :)
> I asked myself this question: What is the future role of the University?
> The university may serve as a repository for books, a place to do
> research, and a meeting place. Lectures? I'm not sure.
> How do the things that Michael Hammer & Lisa W. Hershman talk about fit in?
> They wrote a book titled, "Faster, Cheaper, Better: The 9 Levers for
> Transforming How Work Gets Done".
> I believe they were talking about Business Process Improvement (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_improvement). Would
> Process Owners, as mentioned by them, serve a major role in the Industrial
> Internet? (http://it.toolbox.com/wiki/index.php/Process_Owner)
> ----------------
> Resources that I am considering reading:
> The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, Evengy Morozov, 2011
> To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism,
> Evengy Morozov, 2013
> The Wealth of Networks, Yochai Benkler, Yale University Press, 2006
> Science and the Crisis in Society, Frank H. George, Wiley, 1970
> Future Perfect: The Case for Progress in a Networked Age, Steven Johnson,
> 2012
> Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organization Without Organizations,
> Clay Shirky, 2008
> Nasa's Advanced Automation for Space Missions,
> http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/ (Robots, Expert Systems, Etc..), The
> Technical Stuff, 1980
> The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change, Al Gore, 2013,
> http://www.amazon.com/The-Future-Drivers-Global-Change/dp/0812992946,
> Reviewed by Tim Berners-Lee, may relate well to the previous link
> An Inquiry to Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Adam
> Smith, LL.D. F.R.S., MDCCCXLIII (1843) (according to Wikipedia, it was
> first published in 1776)
> Books by Chris Anderson and Lawrence Lessig
> Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom,
> Rebecca MacKinnon, 2012
> Business Process Improvement: the breakthrough strategy for total quality,
> productivity, and competitiveness, H J Harrington , 1991
> Faster, better, cheaper : low-cost innovation in the U.S. space program,
> Howard E McCurdy, 2001
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>wrote:
>> it seems to me that these shifts have already started, before 2013,
>> including in these fields, but are also much more long-term transformations
>> ... in the case of deep-pocketed and politically powerful vested interests,
>> only moderate bottom-up advances can be expected in the very short term ...
>> both telecom and banking are still heavily centralized, they enabled
>> people-based p2p dynamics but control the infrastructure, the data, the
>> design and many other aspects of their only partly distributed systems ...
>> I'm sure the same is true of GE .. no corporation will allow a fully p2p
>> distributed system without some form of centralized control
>> Michel
>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:54 AM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
>> metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> 2013 will see the advent of new paradigms for infrastructures that up
>>> until now where centralized, i.e. electric power generation and
>>> distribution, intermodal transportation and logistics, food and
>>> agro-industrial production and distribution, industrial production and
>>> distribution, consumer products manufacturing and distribution,
>>> pharmaceuticals production and distribution, energy extraction and
>>> distribution (including coal, gas, shale oil/gas and biofuels).
>>> The data and telecom infrastructure and parallel the banking and
>>> financial sectors are the only ones espousing decentralized distributed P2P
>>> (and B2B) processes.
>>> Resilience is a property that can only be achieved by copying the
>>> structure of the internet and some of its inherent characteristics.
>>> By defining strategic infrastructures as decentralized networks of
>>> distributed P2P (B2B) processes embedded in an intelligent grid it becomes
>>> possible to define resilience in a way similar to the resilience of the
>>> Internet.
>>> And a resilient grid lends itself perfectly to embedding in a semantic
>>> web overlay grid.
>>> The Industrial Internet as defined by GE and outlined in a recent white
>>> paper comes pretty close to it but not quite yet.
>>> See http://www.gereports.com/meeting-of-minds-and-machines/.
>>> Milton Ponson
>>> GSM: +297 747 8280
>>> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
>>> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
>>> Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for
>>> sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT
>>> tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and
>>> repositories of data and information for sustainable development
>>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
>>> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
>>> addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the
>>> system manager. This message contains confidential information and is
>>> intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee
>>> you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
>>>   ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
>>> *To:* ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com>
>>> *Cc:* Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>; Samuel Rose <
>>> samuel.rose@gmail.com>; "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>; Paul
>>> Cockshott <william.cockshott@glasgow.ac.uk>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 9, 2013 2:10 AM
>>> *Subject:* Re: A Distributed Economy -- A blog involving Linked Data
>>> Oh well, I'll share my story on a W3C forum no less.
>>> Model, true. Would my experiences even translate? I think you'd have to
>>> see this from my own personal perspective. Even though I grew up in an
>>> American home there was a lot of discourse in my family. There wasn't a lot
>>> of room for personal expression, and my family was very religious so I was
>>> afraid of offending God if I went against the dominating figure and/or
>>> ideology in the family. I was also very shy growing up, and I did not have
>>> much money, even though I came from an upper middle class family. I felt
>>> out of place most of the time, and sometimes I had ideas that people did
>>> not seem to understand or be interested in. I liked computers, and wanted
>>> to learn more about them. I was always asking people doing computer stuff
>>> how to program, even though I had a lot of trouble doing it myself. I think
>>> it was because I struggled with algebra (and other maths), but more so
>>> algebra. I also was a bit lost in some documentation, and may have not been
>>> fully aware of other resources that may have helped. I was afraid of
>>> tinkering, but I built webpages and was proud of them and I also built
>>> structures in the woods (but that is a bit off topic). My family paid for
>>> my college. I'm thankful for that, but it also leaves me with a feeling of
>>> responsibility to them. I'll admit to not being in sync with things in my
>>> undergraduate years. It looks very good if you have an internship. But at
>>> the time I made a few mistakes perhaps. I was a bit afraid to try because
>>> the companies I qualified for either were not doing something that
>>> interested me and/or something that I felt reflected my beliefs, values and
>>> possibly something else that is hard to describe. In short, perhaps
>>> passion. Over time I realized that it would probably be wiser to accept
>>> things as is if I ever hoped to be employed. Making the sale was difficult
>>> though. I think perhaps people think I'm lazy, or uniformed, because I did
>>> not work (except for academic things) in college. Or was it emotion? Ideas
>>> out of place? I was also affected by many of the same family things growing
>>> up.
>>> I have an interest in physics, electronics, economics, systems, etc. I
>>> think that if I ever hope to use my education, and share what I have
>>> learned, I need to do something amazing. I could go back to school, take on
>>> a lot of debt, and just hope that I get enough good grades to impress
>>> enough people (and not have them think I'd get bored when trying to get a
>>> job). Or I could learn things on my own, participate in projects, and hope
>>> that people receive me with open arms.
>>> Since 2007 when I discovered Polywell nuclear fusion I've gained new
>>> perspective on the world. I never actually built a fusion reactor, but I
>>> did try to learn what was behind them. This motivated me to read lots of
>>> books, and my desire to do other things to explore my uniqueness as an
>>> individual led to even more books. GNU/Linux facilitated my graduate work,
>>> and I can relate to it's philosophy through my many frustrations. Open
>>> source is great, because I don't have to worry so much about my skills
>>> wasting away. Being at the university also helps. I also don't have to
>>> manufacture things or do anything special to have excitement about it.
>>> But you know, how much can you actually get from someone who hasn't
>>> experienced that much real employment? Because of that automatically people
>>> see me in a certain way. And my views may not be necessarily realistic for
>>> lack of experience. But whatever it is, it seems I have have found a lot of
>>> energy and my friends seem to notice. I think about what I am learning more
>>> too.
>>> But would this model help people in the real world? I feel that had it
>>> existed it could have helped me growing up, but that is my own personal
>>> experience. In addition to studying, a lot of my peers spent their time
>>> drinking beer, socializing, and playing and/or watching sports. And most
>>> seemed to have more money. Now most seem to have even more money, and spend
>>> time on Facebook talking about things they have bought or families that
>>> they are raising. Their educational level is hard to discern. Not many seem
>>> to be posting things about hacking, making or things that might suggest
>>> deep insight. But not everyone fits that.
>>> I guess what matters is whether it will work or not, and whether it
>>> truly will benefit others. For that both an experiment and conversation
>>> will help. Thank you Samuel for referring me to Michael. Milton, I am not
>>> certain what it will do yet.
>>> I am not certain what resilience truly means. I'm definitely bothered by
>>> the wastefulness brought upon by obsolescence of products. It would be much
>>> better I think if we knew how they worked so we could reuse the them (I'm
>>> saying the parts) in other things. We've had this problem at the
>>> hackerspace. We have lots of stuff around that if we had the blueprint, it
>>> would be much better. If we knew how this blueprint connected to other
>>> things I personally think that would be even better.
>>> On a separate issue. In graduate school there were people there that
>>> seemed really lost. I mean they were doing their work, but didn't seem to
>>> have a joy about it. There also was not a lot of organization, and it was
>>> hard to find things.
>>> Outside of school, there are people that I know could go to graduate
>>> school but didn't. It was frustrating to me that I could not seem to sell
>>> them on thinking more deeply about things, or when they said I was really
>>> smart (but did not have the confidence or belief that they could do it
>>> themselves). Still others just weren't there. I've seen those who weren't
>>> there at the hackerspace. I question why, and think the world would be a
>>> better place if this could be tapped into.
>>> "
>>> Roberto Verzola is to my mind the political economist who has done most
>>> in studying this, see
>>> http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Commons_Economics ; Wolfgang
>>> Hoeschele is planning an ambitious database based on a Needs,
>>> Organisational REsources, (I forgot what the A stands for)
>>> I'm  sure that the proposed modelling effort will contribute to this
>>> field; if you are ideologically open, you may also want to talk with people
>>> like Paul Cockshott and the people of the Center for Transition Science at
>>> UNAM in Mexico City; who are very good at econometric modelling and
>>> interested in a cybernetic planning revival, "
>>> I still have to think more about this. I was reading over it a bit today.
>>> I might have seen something about this today. Someone was talking about
>>> how technologies were allowing us (or could? ) to become more mobile, and
>>> that people really didn't have to be co located. I don't remember what
>>> technologies that they were referring.
>>> "Peer to peer processes in addition should be defined as geography
>>> independent, historically nomads, hunter gatherers and technomads in the
>>> modern age all show this to be true."
>>> I hope to write soon.
>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Brent Shambaugh <
>>> brent.shambaugh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm feeling that this is shaped by my own personal experience? I'm
>>> willing, but should I risk putting it out there?
>> --
>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
Received on Saturday, 16 March 2013 06:18:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:30 UTC