-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
diary-apr-2011.htm
610 lines (607 loc) · 41 KB
/
diary-apr-2011.htm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<title>diary-apr-2011 </title>
<link href=".code/preferred.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"/>
</head>
<body>
<p class='header'>
<a href="_home.htm">Home</a> | <a href="_faq.htm">FAQ</a> | <a href="_thesis.htm">Thesis</a> | <a href="_diary.htm">Diary</a> | <a href="_projects.htm">Projects</a> | <a href="resume.htm">Resume</a> | <a href="_todo.htm">Todo</a> | <a href="_index.htm">Index</a> |<p>
<p class='main'><span class="rel">Related:</span> <a href="diary.htm">diary</a><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-29-2011:</span> Wanting to remix <a class="ext" href="http://SoftwareFreedom.org/events/2011/fosdem/moglen-fosdem-keynote.html">SoftwareFreedom.org/events/2011/fosdem/moglen-fosdem-keynote.html</a><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-29-2011:</span> Re: <small>[<a href="free.htm">Free</a>dombox-discuss]</small> Project plan?<br/>
<span class="quot">> Patrick Anderson wrote:</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> I'm talking about <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing <a href="free.htm">Free</a> as in <a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom <a href="cloud.htm">Cloud</a></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> <a href="compu.htm">Compu</a>ting by addressing the issues that arise when</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> we try to share <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware.</span><br/>
<br/>
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> How does that relate to "the silverlining of the <a href="cloud.htm">cloud</a>" as defined by</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> Eben Moglen and the common attractor at this <a href="mail.htm">mail</a>inglist?</span><br/>
<br/>
Do you sincerely not see how they relate?<br/>
<br/>
I'm saying we will never have a silver-lining of the <a href="cloud.htm">cloud</a><br/>
while the <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers are silver-lining their pockets<br/>
by stopping us from fulfilling our dreams.<br/>
<br/>
We, the people; we, the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s must <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> and co-control the<br/>
physical infrastructure required for the communications we seek.<br/>
<br/>
We cannot rely upon the <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ern-day feudalists to provide us with<br/>
what we need, for their seeking to keep <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> requires<br/>
they withhold solutions and create <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial barriers to stop us from<br/>
gaining the <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom that would put them out of business.<br/>
<br/>
If we do not organize and learn how to share <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware for our <a href="own.htm">own</a><br/>
benefit, we will forever be enslaved and subjugated by those who<br/>
organize and <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware <small>(through mutual <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s etc.)</small> for the<br/>
sole purpose of subjugating us!<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-29-2011:</span> Re: <small>[<a href="free.htm">Free</a>dombox-discuss]</small> Project plan?<br/>
<br/>
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> It is _very_ exciting to hear about all the great things people are</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="work.htm">work</a>ing on inventing, and all the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> kinds of <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware people are</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="work.htm">work</a>ing on getting <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom-enabling technologies into besides Plug</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> devices.</span><br/>
<br/>
Just to be clear,<br/>
<br/>
I'm not talking about inventing <a href="new.htm">new</a> kinds of <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware,<br/>
I'm talking about trying to share off-the-shelf <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware<br/>
in a way that <a href="protect.htm">protect</a>s <a href="user.htm">User</a> <a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom while achieving<br/>
the benefits of <a href="econ.htm">econ</a>omy of scale that helps <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>rietary<br/>
<a href="cloud.htm">cloud</a> providers under<a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e and outperform what we,<br/>
the people can <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently offer to ourselves.<br/>
<br/>
I'm talking about <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing <a href="free.htm">Free</a> as in <a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom <a href="cloud.htm">Cloud</a><br/>
<a href="compu.htm">Compu</a>ting by addressing the issues that arise when<br/>
we try to share <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware.<br/>
<br/>
If we don't solve this issue at least for the connections<br/>
between us, then the ISPs that 'provide' and 'carry' us<br/>
will continue to be able to stop us for whatever arbitrary<br/>
reason they see fit as they strive to keep <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-29-2011:</span> Re: <small>[<a href="free.htm">Free</a>dombox-discuss]</small> Project plan?<br/>
<br/>
Anthony Callegaro wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> I am trying to get some time to implement a Dropbox replacement</span><br/>
<br/>
I think this is a great goal because it is fairly simple and<br/>
widely <a href="use.htm">use</a>d. For the same reasons, I would like to help<br/>
create a solution for e<a href="mail.htm">mail</a>.<br/>
<br/>
But, while the software is already available, what I see missing<br/>
is the ability to *host* these solutions in a shared way.<br/>
<br/>
I understand <a href="free.htm">Free</a>domBox is all about individualistic <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership<br/>
based in a very small device, and there are good reasons for some<br/>
of that, though I'm not so sure these Plug <a href="compu.htm">Compu</a>ters are <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly<br/>
that <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> from a very low-end Personal <a href="compu.htm">Compu</a>ter...<br/>
<br/>
But even after we all have PC, there will still be value in<br/>
pooling some a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> of <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware in a semi-centralized fashion<br/>
because of how the <a href="econ.htm">econ</a>omy of scale can bring down <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s and<br/>
simplify <a href="admin.htm">admin</a>istration.<br/>
<br/>
So my question becomes: Is there room on this list for the<br/>
discussion of sharing <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware and <a href="work.htm">work</a>ing-out the complexities<br/>
of <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership, or is that beyond the scope of what <a href="free.htm">Free</a>domBox<br/>
is meant to cover?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Sincerely,<br/>
Patrick Anderson<br/>
<a href="econ.htm">Econ</a>omic Systems Debugger<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com">http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-20-2011:</span> <small>[fcf_discussion]</small> <a href="net.htm">Net</a> Neutrality: The European Commission Gives Up on <a href="user.htm">User</a>s and Innovators<br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="user.htm">user</a>s "voting with their feet" by switching</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> operators can solve any infringement</span><br/>
<br/>
<a href="user.htm">User</a>s can solve this permanently by organizing<br/>
to co-buy and <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the physical layer for<br/>
themselves, for their <a href="own.htm">own</a> collective benefit.<br/>
<br/>
This will give <a href="user.htm">User</a>s absolute dominion over<br/>
their destiny without ever needing to beg<br/>
<a href="own.htm">own</a>ers, since they will then BE the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers!<br/>
<br/>
<a href="user.htm">User</a>s already <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s of access and<br/>
they *also* <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
When we, the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s, awake from our slumber to<br/>
see how silly we have been for not accepting<br/>
the responsability and risks of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership, we<br/>
will see that we can and must <a href="own.htm">own</a> to be <a href="free.htm">free</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-20-2011:</span> Using TV frequency white <a href="spac.htm">spac</a>es extends WiFi reach<br/>
Sepp wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Houston non<a href="profit.htm">profit</a> Technology For All <small>(TFA)</small></span><br/>
<br/>
Here is the TFA homepage: <a class="ext" href="http://TechForAll.org">http://TechForAll.org</a><br/>
<br/>
They received $9.6 Million grant from the National Telecommunications<br/>
Infrastructure <a href="admin.htm">Admin</a>istration <small>(NTIA)</small> September, 2010.<br/>
<br/>
I wonder who <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly <a href="own.htm">own</a>s and controls TFA...<br/>
<br/>
William S. Reed, D.Min. as the President & CEO. --<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://TechForAll.org/AboutUs/Staff/tabid/56">http://TechForAll.org/AboutUs/Staff/tabid/56</a> shows<br/>
<br/>
He has <a href="work.htm">work</a>ed on the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee <a href="work.htm">Work</a>ing Group on<br/>
Rural and Underserved <a href="pop.htm">Pop</a>ulations. Representing TFA, he serves on the<br/>
Technology Infrastructure Task Force of the Greater Houston<br/>
<a href="part.htm">Part</a>nership, among other things.<br/>
<br/>
He co-authored "Developing and deploying multihop wireless <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>s<br/>
for low-income communities <small>(2005)</small>" --<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.122.81">http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.122.81</a><br/>
<br/>
More about the Huston Wireless initiative:<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://TechForAll.org/Programs/ResearchandInnovation/TFAWireless/tabid/107">http://TechForAll.org/Programs/ResearchandInnovation/TFAWireless/tabid/107</a><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-20-2011:</span> <small>[P2P-URBANISM WA]</small> a debate on country-city <small>(dis)</small>urbanism, moscow 1930<br/>
Jan Wiklund wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> We will simply not afford automobility in a fairly close future.</span><br/>
<br/>
Every city has ornamental plants, and more are being <a href="install.htm">install</a>ed.<br/>
<br/>
We can choose manufacturing plants for future <a href="install.htm">install</a>ations<br/>
without causing any dispersion of humans <a href="liv.htm">liv</a>ing there.<br/>
<br/>
Unless maybe you are saying we should eliminate ALL plants,<br/>
even the purely ornamental varieties - and surround ourselves<br/>
with only inorganic materials to reduce transportation <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-16-2011:</span> <small>[Open Manufacturing]</small> Open <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>ed Blueprints for Civilization<br/>
John Griessen wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> As I understood it, he's hoping for a 10kw "steel melter".</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> So he'll need good insulation to keep in the white heat.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
White heat?<br/>
<br/>
This reminds me of "Solar "Death Ray": Power of 5000 suns!"<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://YouTube.com/watch?v=TtzRAjW6KO0">http://YouTube.com/watch?v=TtzRAjW6KO0</a><br/>
<br/>
But this kind of <a href="free.htm">free</a> energy can always be retracted by our<br/>
'representatives' through Global Dimming, from "Aerosol<br/>
Geoengineering"<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_sulfate_aerosols_%28geoengineering%29">http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_sulfate_aerosols_%28geoengineering%29</a><br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBjDSNWiuKQ">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBjDSNWiuKQ</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3YKIhxP9Ts">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3YKIhxP9Ts</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRot4ihq1JU">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRot4ihq1JU</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBuXKPWmC7o">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBuXKPWmC7o</a><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-16-2011:</span> concerning an <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>al structure<br/>
Devin Balkind wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> My intention is to create a graphic that shows people how to structure an</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> open project. My chart intends to describe the democractic governance of a</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> foundation that supports/<a href="protect.htm">protect</a>s the <a href="work.htm">work</a> of a <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipatory community that</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> creates a '<a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d' released through media to <a href="user.htm">user</a>s.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> I've added 2 other graphs after my first slide that address issues of</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> transparency within a polisci frame<a href="work.htm">work</a>.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a class="ext" href="https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0AbhSktWsQi1VZGRyZ3NncnZfMjUwZm1obmJ3Y2s&hl=en">https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0AbhSktWsQi1VZGRyZ3NncnZfMjUwZm1obmJ3Y2s&hl=en</a></span><br/>
<br/>
I am very concerned the graph seems to show <a href="user.htm">User</a>s being disallowed<br/>
entrance, when they should be a central to the movement.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="free.htm">Free</a> Software developers often do the <a href="work.htm">work</a> <small>(play)</small> they do because they<br/>
are scratching an itch - in other words they are <a href="user.htm">User</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
Ric<a href="hard.htm">hard</a> <a href="stallman.htm">Stallman</a> <small>(Saint IGNUcius)</small> preaches "<a href="free.htm">Free</a> software is a matter<br/>
of the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s' <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom" -- <a class="ext" href="http://GNU.org/philosophy/free-sw.html">http://GNU.org/philosophy/free-sw.html</a><br/>
<br/>
Steve Ballmer wrongly preaches "Developers, Developers, Developers,<br/>
Developers" -- <a class="ext" href="http://YouTube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE">http://YouTube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Devin Balkind wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> If people are contributing to the project, I'd consider them a <a href="part.htm">part</a> of the</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> community. <a href="user.htm">User</a>'s aren't disallowed entrance, they're just choosing not to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> become <a href="part.htm">part</a> of the community by limiting their interaction with the '<a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d'</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> to be simply using the <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d and <small>(possible)</small> sharing the results with others.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> I updated the graph to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e this more clear, but I'm very much not a</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> designer and I think there's lots of room for improvement, especially around</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> how the foundation is represented.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<br/>
Thanks for <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing that change.<br/>
The <a href="new.htm">new</a> version is much better.<br/>
<br/>
Showing the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s as an outermost<br/>
container is I think better than my<br/>
suggestion to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e them central.<br/>
<br/>
It fits well with a metaphor I have<br/>
struggled to convey in a pleasing<br/>
manner - where the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s should<br/>
accept the roles to <a href="protect.htm">protect</a>, guard,<br/>
and generally support the welfare<br/>
of those who have the <a href="skill.htm">skill</a>s to do<br/>
the <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>ding that must be done.<br/>
<br/>
This includes shouldering the risks<br/>
and burdens of <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ing, <a href="install.htm">install</a>ing,<br/>
and maintaining all of the Physical<br/>
<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es any <a href="art.htm">art</a>isans will need to<br/>
accomplish the goals of '<a href="buil.htm">buil</a>ding'.<br/>
<br/>
I believe we must eventually also<br/>
include a way to supply a sort of<br/>
"Basic Outcome" for those players<br/>
so they don't need to worry about<br/>
the distracting problems of food,<br/>
shelter, basic health care, etc.<br/>
<br/>
I envision a wide variety of these<br/>
structures - at least one for each<br/>
kind of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t that any subgroup<br/>
within a community may want.<br/>
<br/>
Each subgroup of <a href="user.htm">user</a>s buys or <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s<br/>
the construction of such a structure<br/>
<small>(say a milk dairy or Avocado orc<a href="hard.htm">hard</a>)</small><br/>
and then attract those with <a href="skill.htm">skill</a>s and<br/>
the desire to operate those <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es by<br/>
offering to operate some <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es in<br/>
the community for which they have<br/>
<a href="skill.htm">skill</a> and desire <small>(say fixing teeth or<br/>
shoveling manure)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
Operating in this way will allow us to<br/>
minimize the need to <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>e goods while<br/>
maximizing our opportunities to <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>e<br/>
a wider variety of <a href="skill.htm">skill</a>s which will <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e<br/>
<a href="work.htm">work</a> seem more like play because we<br/>
will be <a href="lib.htm">lib</a>erated from the monotony<br/>
and repetition of doing the same <a href="job.htm">job</a><br/>
for much longer than we might want<br/>
because we, as <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers, will not be<br/>
tied-down to the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es<br/>
<small>(<a href="land.htm">land</a>, tools, <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>dings, etc.)</small> we are<br/>
usually required to <a href="fund.htm">fund</a> ourselves,<br/>
but will leave that responsibility to<br/>
the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s who desire that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-16-2011:</span> cutting out middle men - bulk buying <br/>
Dante-Gabryell Monson wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> the <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>a is to bulk buy food, mostly locally <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ed food,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> as to reduce <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>es for consumers,</span><br/>
<br/>
I <a href="agree.htm">agree</a> "bulk buy" is a great way to begin.<br/>
<br/>
I see this as one way for consumers to<br/>
"pre <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>" for the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts they need.<br/>
<br/>
We could open a grocery <a href="stor.htm">stor</a>e where<br/>
some customers would "pre <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>" for<br/>
the great savings, while others might<br/>
buy <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts in the 'normal' fashion.<br/>
<br/>
We would charge <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> against those<br/>
who <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> late <small>(whatever the market<br/>
will bear in that area)</small>, but then treat<br/>
that overpayment as though that<br/>
customer had "pre paid" for the next<br/>
round of bulk buy.<br/>
<br/>
It is important to charge <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> against<br/>
late comers because if we don't, the<br/>
<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t will be far too cheap - causing<br/>
a sort of 'scalping' where middle-men<br/>
would buy all of the low-<a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e goods<br/>
and then resell them to other to collect<br/>
that <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> - removing our ability to<br/>
treat it in the special manner <small>(as <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>er<br/>
investment)</small> needed to establish the<br/>
negative-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop <a href="use.htm">use</a>d to keep<br/>
the collective auto-distributed during<br/>
growth.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Sorry if my suggestions are not exactly<br/>
what you envision, I am only trying to<br/>
brain<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>m a way for us to grow such an<br/>
endeavor without suffering the typical<br/>
fate of all other well intentioned orgs.<br/>
<br/>
Let me <a href="know.htm">know</a> what you think.<br/>
<br/>
And yes, I am willing to do software <a href="work.htm">work</a><br/>
for this, though I am more of a c/c++ guy.<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-16-2011:</span> The Paradox of Dictatorship in Open Ventures <small>(was: What is ProM)</small><br/>
Matt Cooperrider wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> set yourself up as a weird sort of dictator</span><br/>
<span class="bullet">.</span>..<br/>
<span class="quot">> Linus Torvald's original post on the creation of Linux</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Linux-Mag.com/id/1231">http://Linux-Mag.com/id/1231</a> wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot2">>> "The Great Dictator: An Interview with Linus Torvalds"</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> He may be benevolent and he may be delegating more <a href="work.htm">work</a>, but the Linux kernel remains Linus's project.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torvalds/index.shtml">http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torvalds/index.shtml</a><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> "Grand Replicator aka Benevolent Dictator"</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> Actually Linus operated and operates like a dictator and rules the development of the kernel with an iron fist</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://WikiQuote.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds">http://WikiQuote.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds</a> wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot2">>> My name is Linus Torvalds and I am your god.</span><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-14-2011:</span> Feeding America<br/>
Vicki Escarra, President & CEO <info@<a class="ext" href="http://feedingamerica.org">feedingamerica.org</a>> wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> I wanted to alert you to this crisis right away and ask for your immediate support. We must raise $1,060,301 between now and June 30th to provide 7.4 million meals for American families in desperate need.</span><br/>
<br/>
How about using some of that <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y to purchase the *<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es* of food - such as <a href="land.htm">Land</a>, Water rights, Heirloom seeds, Chickens, Cattle, etc?<br/>
<br/>
Why rely upon Giga-Corporations to supply us with the output of Genetically <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified Organisms <a href="spray.htm">spray</a>ed with dangerous petro-chemical?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> The problem is so severe that Feeding America's <a href="own.htm">own</a> <a href="employ.htm">employ</a>ees have pitched in, offering an unprecedented $109,598 matching grant. That means every dollar you give will double to help get 14 meals to hungry Americans.</span><br/>
<br/>
$218,000 that can be spent toward un-pinning ourselves from under the thumb of these <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ern-day feudalists.<br/>
<br/>
You may think "Well, if we plant Almond trees and Grape vines and Avocado trees in our cities, it will just be too much <a href="work.htm">work</a>."<br/>
<br/>
While the next breath will be <a href="use.htm">use</a>d to plead for more <a href="job.htm">job</a>s!<br/>
<br/>
Let's purchase the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion for our <a href="own.htm">OWN</a> benefit, instead of <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ping up the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership of those that rape our planet and pillage our <a href="liv.htm">liv</a>elyhoods.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-14-2011:</span> Hybrid <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a>ing - Growth Edge Dynamics<br/>
<span class="quot">> Poor Ric<a href="hard.htm">hard</a> wrote:</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> and whose <a href="user.htm">user</a>s don't have to keep <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing for the</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> copper/fiber/satellites/etc. forever and ever and ever.</span><br/>
<br/>
<a href="user.htm">User</a>s will only <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> *<a href="real.htm">real</a>* re<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ing <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s once they <small>(we)</small><br/>
<a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the physical layer. You don't <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> more than <a href="cost.htm">cost</a><br/>
for transmitting bits across your <a href="liv.htm">liv</a>ing-room because you<br/>
<a href="own.htm">own</a> those wires. The same is true for multi-<a href="own.htm">own</a>er wire.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Charles N Wyble wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> scale and an associated revenue <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>el <small>(give away 50%</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> of the ad revenue in various chunks to the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> tiers)</small>. This keeps</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y local, drives the folks with the highest stake to keep things up and</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> running etc.</span><br/>
<br/>
This is similar to the hybrid <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ing approach I am trying to finalize now.<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence I <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ose is that 50% of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>s be treated as though it<br/>
were a <a href="real.htm">real</a> investment from and for the <a href="user.htm">user</a> who paid it - so the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s<br/>
gain *<a href="real.htm">real</a>* <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> as it grows.<br/>
<br/>
This creates a strange dynamic where <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is incrementally eliminated<br/>
for those <a href="user.htm">user</a>s who <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> it long enough - since <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers don't need to buy<br/>
the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t from themselves, but <a href="own.htm">own</a> it already as a result of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the<br/>
<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es - and from <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing the re<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ing <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
This leaves only a "Growth Edge" for <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itional <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ers to reap <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>s;<br/>
one which will expand in circumference, but will leave a wake of <a href="user.htm">User</a>-<br/>
<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ed <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion in it's path - effectively destroying the 'market' for<br/>
that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t for any other competitor, since how can a Capitalist possibly<br/>
compete with at-<a href="cost.htm">cost</a> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion that <a href="user.htm">User</a>-<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership provides?<br/>
<br/>
This will be <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion Of, By, and For the People, but not centralized to<br/>
any small, so-called 'representative' groups who might fondle a kill-switch.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-13-2011:</span> <a href="work.htm">Work</a>ing on <a href="imput.htm">Imput</a>ed <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion as an answer to the NextNet "P2P Value Exchange" <a href="thread.htm">thread</a><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-01-2011:</span> Facebook page<br/>
reine reine <small>(using G<a href="mail.htm">mail</a>)</small> wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Facebook=HELL</span><br/>
<br/>
Is Google not evil?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Do you <a href="own.htm">own</a> your data?</span><br/>
<br/>
Those who <a href="own.htm">own</a> the <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware pwn the data.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> are the exchanges crypted?</span><br/>
<br/>
Those who <a href="own.htm">own</a> the <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware pwn your <a href="pass.htm">pass</a>word.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> are you a node or is there a centralised server</span><br/>
<br/>
Is G<a href="mail.htm">mail</a> not centralized?<br/>
<br/>
De-centralization is not the only way.<br/>
<br/>
We can, and even *must* learn to share<br/>
if we expect to continue as a species.<br/>
<br/>
We have been fooled into believing<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is the only reason for <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion,<br/>
while forgetting the original purpose of<br/>
<a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t itself.<br/>
<br/>
We, the people, can and must learn to<br/>
<a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of the<br/>
goods and services we need instead<br/>
of begging the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent pwners to do<br/>
what we wish.<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent pwners have no choice but<br/>
to <a href="work.htm">work</a> against us because the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s<br/>
they have chosen require <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e be kept<br/>
above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> - for the only reward they<br/>
can <a href="imag.htm">imag</a>ine is the one called <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent pwners CANNOT do the right<br/>
thing because the financeers who risked<br/>
to begin that operation did so for the<br/>
single-minded purpose of keeping <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e<br/>
above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
When we finally awake from our slumber<br/>
and see the simplicity of the direct<br/>
solution we will begin attracting <a href="user.htm">User</a>s<br/>
to pre-<a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for goods and services and<br/>
we will cause those <a href="pay.htm">Pay</a>ers to receive<br/>
<a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership of the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es<br/>
of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, for when the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s<br/>
<a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the Material Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion,<br/>
<a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e and <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> is the same - for there<br/>
no longer is any need to SELL the result,<br/>
for it is already in the hands of those<br/>
who need it!<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-01-2011:</span> Facebook page<br/>
Sepp Hasslberger wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> What I am saying is that nothing is out there that can viably be <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>osed to people who aren't geeks and who are not <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly internet savvy, to <a href="use.htm">use</a> instead of facebook.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<br/>
Facebook is not just software and data, it is also <a href="hard.htm">HARD</a>WARE needed to<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span>host* that software and data.<br/>
<br/>
The problem we face has far more to do with the *<a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware*.<br/>
<br/>
We are losing because we refuse to address the <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware issue except<br/>
in solitary confinement.<br/>
<br/>
The central issue is that we must learn how to share the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s of<br/>
<a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ing the <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware.<br/>
<br/>
We, the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s, already <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for all the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s anyway AND we <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
If we, the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s, were to <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>ware for our collective<br/>
benefit we would still need to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
But we would not, and even could not <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> since we would not be<br/>
buying bandwidth and <a href="stor.htm">stor</a>age <a href="back.htm">back</a> from ourselves, but each would <a href="own.htm">own</a><br/>
the % they already paid for - as a result of the % of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the<br/>
<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t and that they had paid* their re<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ing<br/>
portion of the operational <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
<small>(*)</small> A <a href="user.htm">user</a> can '<a href="pay.htm">Pay</a>' by achieving goals <small>(<a href="work.htm">work</a>ing)</small> needed by subgroups<br/>
of the collective others, or by committing <a href="land.htm">land</a> or tools or <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>dings<br/>
to the collective others, or even by using regular old debt-based<br/>
<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ency to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for things we cannot yet supply for ourselves. As we<br/>
grow, we will integrate vertically - buying or <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>ding electricity<br/>
<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion facilities, factories to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e <a href="compu.htm">compu</a>ters, foundries to forge<br/>
<a href="part.htm">part</a>s, and even mines and factories, tools, <a href="land.htm">land</a> etc. needed to <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d<br/>
the tools to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e the tools, and also the <a href="land.htm">land</a> and water rights and<br/>
seeds and eggs and spores needed to supply our bodies with energy and<br/>
shelter, recursively through the entire tree of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-01-2011:</span> Nokia and Microsoft - White <a href="spac.htm">Spac</a>es Phone?<br/>
Sepp Hasslberger wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Nokia and Microsoft - White <a href="spac.htm">Spac</a>es Phone?</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a class="ext" href="http://www.dailywireless.org/2011/04/01/nokia-microsoft-white-space-phone/">http://www.dailywireless.org/2011/04/01/nokia-microsoft-white-space-phone/</a></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> Could this be a <a href="game.htm">game</a> changing technology for a distributed <a href="net.htm">net</a>?</span><br/>
<br/>
This is a spectrum-grab that will finally be <a href="use.htm">use</a>d against us.<br/>
<br/>
We will not <a href="own.htm">Own</a> and Control those boxes, and so THEY will dominate US in various ways to extract our wealth by applying <a href="art.htm">Art</a>ificial Scarcity to cause us to overpay for that connectivity.<br/>
<br/>
They will stop us from accessing information at <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>, and instead charge <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> against us without ever using that overpayment as our investment toward <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ing a <a href="part.htm">part</a> of that <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> - and thereby keeping US subjugated.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Even if we can every finally <a href="real.htm">real</a>ize how irreplacably important <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership is, their boxes will be creating interference to stop us from using those frequencies for our <a href="own.htm">own</a> benefit.<br/>
<br/>
Corporations, as they are <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently structured and <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ed, can NOT do the right thing, for to do so would destroy the only <small>(unfortunate)</small> purpose for which they have organized == to extract <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> from the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
The only way to solve this completely is to:<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> Organize <a href="user.htm">User</a>s to <a href="fund.htm">fund</a> and therefore <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the physical layer for their <a href="own.htm">own</a> benefit. This will allow us to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> only <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s since <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is undefined when we do not buy the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t but <a href="own.htm">own</a> it *already* as a side-effect of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> When surplus <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t <small>(bandwidth or <a href="stor.htm">stor</a>age in this case)</small> is sold to <a href="user.htm">User</a>s who have insufficient <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership, we should collect <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> from them*, but must treat that overpayment as <a href="pay.htm">Pay</a>er Investment - growing the <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> while simultaneously and continuously distributing the <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership of that <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> to those who are willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for it.<br/>
<br/>
<small>(*)</small> It may sound hypocritical to say we should collect <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> <small>(charge <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>)</small>, but if we do not, the <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t will be resold for a <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> anyway, and yet will not be under our collective control, and so will not be able to apply the Negative-Feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop <small>(treating <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as <a href="pay.htm">Pay</a>er investment)</small> needed to <a href="insur.htm">insur</a>e every <a href="user.htm">User</a> gains the <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership needed to help them STOP <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> - for the <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>er of Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s, but does not BUY the <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t since he <a href="own.htm">own</a>s it already as a result of his <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Apr-01-2011:</span> P2P Value Exchange : ContactSummit@<a class="ext" href="http://GoogleGroups.com">GoogleGroups.com</a><br/>
CulturalEngineer wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> THE <a href="cost.htm">COST</a> OF P2P TRANSACTIONS, ESPECIALLY IN CERTAIN</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> DEFINED AREAS MUST BE SUBSTANTIALLY ELIMINATED.</span><br/>
<br/>
When you say '<a href="cost.htm">cost</a>', I wonder if you are talking about the '<a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e'<br/>
a consumer <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
Sorry if that seems nit-<a href="pic.htm">pic</a>king, but it is very important that we<br/>
separate the two, for the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence between <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e and <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> is<br/>
the magical value called <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>, and <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is *undefined* when<br/>
consumers <small>(co-)</small><a href="own.htm">own</a> the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
For example, you must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all of the initial and re<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ing <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s<br/>
to <a href="install.htm">install</a> and maintain a <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> within your home, but you do<br/>
not buy that connectivity <a href="back.htm">back</a> from yourself each month, and<br/>
so can only <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> the <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s, while <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is meaningless.<br/>
<br/>
This is profoundly significant considering the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> of <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y<br/>
the corporate ISPs celebrate as 'earnings' each Quarter.<br/>
<br/>
We, the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s, <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> that extra value called <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>, and yet we<br/>
never gain <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in those <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>s, and so remain<br/>
dependent upon those 'providers'.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is something that we must charge against non-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ers,<br/>
during growth, but we must treat that overpayment as an<br/>
investment from those late-comers which we will <a href="use.htm">use</a> to grow<br/>
the size of the <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>, but will finally 'vest' to those <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ers<br/>
as their <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership - so the <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> can scale without<br/>
the concentrating <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership <small>(and power)</small> into the hands of<br/>
the few initiators.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Some round figures: $25 times 150 million voters is $3,750,000,000.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> That would be all of 50 cents a week <small>(giving you even a couple of</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> weeks off for holidays!)</small></span><br/>
<br/>
I <a href="agree.htm">agree</a>. We, the People, must invest to <a href="fund.htm">fund</a> and <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the physical<br/>
layer for the purpose of having <a href="real.htm">real</a> control and also for the immense<br/>
benefit of avoiding <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing tribute to others.<br/>
<br/>
Dis-Tribute == Without-Tribute<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Anyway, because of the frame<a href="work.htm">work</a> envisioned for its <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership and</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> governance, it offers the potential to establish a Commons-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ed</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> counter-balance to the private forces which may come to depend on it.</span><br/>
<br/>
This sounds very interesting, and I <a href="know.htm">know</a> I've been to your site before.<br/>
<br/>
Could you give a brief summary of the approach you envision?<br/>
<br/>
Thanks,<br/>
Patrick<br/>
</p>
<p class='footer'>
Page generated from <a href=".text/diary-apr-2011">diary-apr-2011</a> by <a href=".code/etym.el">etym</a>.</p>
</body>
</html>