-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
diary-dec-2010.htm
622 lines (619 loc) · 42.5 KB
/
diary-dec-2010.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
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
<?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-dec-2010 </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">Dec-31-2010:</span> <small>[BTS Contact]</small> <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership and Governance Details<br/>
Kosta -- A Human Right wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> over time even the most well intentioned committee can lose it's values</span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, this is because <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership is slowly but continuously concentrated<br/>
into the hands of the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers.<br/>
<br/>
That <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership is concentrated because <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> <small>(<a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>)</small> is<br/>
treated as a *reward* for those <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers, further increasing<br/>
their holdings.<br/>
<br/>
The solution to this problem is: the organization must treat all<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> <small>(<a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>)</small> as though it were an *investment* from the<br/>
consumer who paid it.<br/>
<br/>
To reiterate: Control can be continuously auto-distributed to those<br/>
who are willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for it by treating <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as <a href="pay.htm">Pay</a>er investment.<br/>
<br/>
Handling <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as an investment from the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>er is a negative-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a><br/>
loop that solves the long-standing issue of overaccumulation.<br/>
<br/>
Notice this creates a "<a href="user own.htm">User Own</a>ed" organization described at<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://P2PFoundation.net/User_Owned">http://P2PFoundation.net/User_Owned</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-31-2010:</span> <small>[p2p-research]</small> Information <a href="sect.htm">sect</a>or: a qualitative <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>e of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion?<br/>
Roberto Verzola wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> today's ICTs represent a qualitatively <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> *<a href="mod.htm">mod</a>e* of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> the Internet requires a tangible infrastructure, such as a</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> of servers, routers, satellites, undersea cables, <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ems,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> transceivers, <a href="compu.htm">compu</a>ters, CD readers/burners, etc. etc.</span><br/>
<br/>
Would you say it matters who <a href="own.htm">own</a>s and therefore controls these Means<br/>
of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion?<br/>
<br/>
If so, then, in your opinion, who would, <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>ally, those <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers be?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> Should it be the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>ers who manufacture, <a href="install.htm">install</a>, maintain and<br/>
improve them?<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> Should it be the End-<a href="user.htm">User</a>s who want them enough to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for them?<br/>
<br/>
3.)</small> Should it be some combination of those?<br/>
<br/>
4.)</small> Should it be the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently corrupt governments?<br/>
<br/>
5.)</small> Should it be the fuedalists that already <a href="own.htm">own</a> them, and we should<br/>
just beg them to do the right thing?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-28-2010:</span> <small>[p2p-research]</small><br/>
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 6:40 AM, j.martin.pedersen<br/>
<m.pedersen@<a class="ext" href="http://lancaster.ac.uk">lancaster.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> On 30/12/10 03:28, Michel Bauwens wrote:</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> My <a href="own.htm">own</a> view in this is that peer <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, in the context of abundance of</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> digital re<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> I don't understand "abundance logic" without a denial of re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>e,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> labour and energy <a href="use.htm">use</a>. So when you say that you don't disregard those</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> important and very high overlapping social and environmental <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s of</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> digital commons, how does a philosophy and architecture of commons that</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> turn on the concept of abundance actually <a href="work.htm">work</a>?</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<br/>
Keep in mind everything from Avocados to Zucchini can also be "copied<br/>
for zero marginal <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>" once the are established.<br/>
<br/>
In fact, that type of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion is even *less* environmentally <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>ly than<br/>
the industrialization required to <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>e, connect, power, maintain and<br/>
recycle <a href="compu.htm">compu</a>ters.<br/>
<br/>
It also requires less labor when these "manufacturing plants" are local.<br/>
<br/>
My friend in California <a href="own.htm">own</a>s an Avocado tree for which he does nothing<br/>
except to occasionally pluck the fruit.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Sincerely,<br/>
Patrick Anderson<br/>
<a href="social sufficiency coalition.htm">Social Sufficiency Coalition</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com">http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
j.martin.pedersen wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Does the tree not drink water, does it not grow in soil that was stolen</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> from the native people, does your friend not labour to care for it at all?</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Yes, that is why I <a href="use.htm">use</a>d the term "Zero *MARGINAL* <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>" just as those<br/>
who talk about the "abundance of digital re<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion".<br/>
<br/>
In other words, the "abundance of *organic* re<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion" is no <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a><br/>
in terms of <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s to our planet and as to the labor required.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
I am trying to point out, as I think you are, there is no such thing as<br/>
"Immaterial <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion", no matter which sphere is being considered.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Now I expect someone will say<br/>
"Of course there are <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s, nobody is denying that!".<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
But terms like "Zero Marginal <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>" and "Immaterial <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion" and<br/>
even "<a href="free.htm">Free</a>" confuse the conversation and lead many to believe the<br/>
implied claim is that those <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s are simply not important.<br/>
<br/>
Another very common theme in these discussions is that the<br/>
<a href="econ.htm">econ</a>omics of this <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion is now very <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> from the<br/>
past - as though the underlying <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>e of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion and <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership<br/>
of the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion is no longer an issue.<br/>
<br/>
This mixes-in with the dreamy visions of self-replicating robots that<br/>
will save us from ourselves, even though organisms <small>(<a href="use.htm">use</a>d to be)</small><br/>
self-replicating, solar-powered, food manufacturing plants <small>(Monsanto<br/>
is putting an end to this, of course, since <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> requires Scarcity)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-28-2010:</span> To: <a href="net.htm">net</a>time-l e<a href="mail.htm">mail</a> list<br/>
Jacob Appelbaum said:<br/>
<span class="quot">> "I'll be using Tor a lot more than I ever did -- and I <a href="use.htm">use</a>d it a lot,"</span><br/>
<br/>
Tor may seem a solution, but is more likely a 'honeypot' designed by<br/>
the <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ern Gulag to attract and track dissidents.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-28-2010:</span> To: <a class="ext" href="http://FeedingAmerica.org">FeedingAmerica.org</a><br/>
Hello "Feeding America",<br/>
<br/>
I wonder, if instead of simply purchasing finished <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts from mega<br/>
corporations, why not organize all this value and effort toward <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing<br/>
some farms for ourselves?<br/>
<br/>
When we <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> massive corporations such as ConAgra and, indirectly,<br/>
Monsanto to supply us with that which we need, we are sending the<br/>
signal that they should continue on their vicious warpath of lowering<br/>
the biodiversity of the planet.<br/>
<br/>
Have you watched <a class="ext" href="http://FoodInc.org">http://FoodInc.org</a> ?<br/>
<br/>
Since Feeding America is such a large organization, let's switch gears<br/>
and get more vertically integrated into <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
Let's <a href="use.htm">use</a> some of the <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s gathered each year to begin buying the<br/>
Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of food <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion such as the <a href="land.htm">Land</a>, Water rights,<br/>
Tools, Trees, Seeds, Animals, etc. needed to gain some <a href="real.htm">real</a> control<br/>
for our <a href="own.htm">own</a>, mutual benefit.<br/>
<br/>
This will also drastically lower the <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e we must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> to this food -<br/>
since we then will have those <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts at <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> and no longer be <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Is there any reason Feeding America should not move in this direction?<br/>
<br/>
We should be growing Trees full of Olives, Avocados, Almonds, Pecans, Walnuts.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
For our <a href="land.htm">land</a> to flow with Milk and Honey,<br/>
We will need to <a href="own.htm">own</a> the Cattle and Bees.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-28-2010:</span> <small>[Meta<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ency_Project]</small> Some thoughts...<br/>
Uriah Zebadiah wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> I will say that your platform needs to be compatible with investment capital, or your growth curve will be way too slow, and more inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>-friendly competition will blow past you on the way to google or facebook-like market dominance <small>(for a market that barely exists yet :-P)</small>.</span><br/>
<br/>
That mindset may not apply to a true OSV.<br/>
<br/>
Nearly all Open <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e projects you might call 'successful' were grown<br/>
very slowly in comparison to their rivals.<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="gnu.htm">GNU</a> project - which forms the basis of what is now called 'Linux'<br/>
- was <a href="start.htm">start</a>ed by Ric<a href="hard.htm">hard</a> <a href="stallman.htm">Stallman</a> in 1983.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
I think "market dominance" is unnecessary if the goal of the venture<br/>
is <a href="use.htm">Use</a>-Value. We only need enough <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s to begin.<br/>
<br/>
But a goal of <a href="use.htm">Use</a>-Value is <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>icult if all the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s are only<br/>
interested in keeping <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
An alternate <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ing scheme would have some % of the <a href="start.htm">start</a>up <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s<br/>
come from potential End-<a href="user.htm">User</a>s "prepaying" for those results.<br/>
<br/>
These <a href="user.htm">User</a>-Inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s would receive a <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>out of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t instead of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
They would not buy the outputs, but would <a href="own.htm">own</a> them already as a<br/>
side-effect of their <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ing the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Food <small>(local permaculture food systems, plus processing and distribution)</small></span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, let's attract middle-to-high income households to *prepay* for<br/>
organic foods.<br/>
<br/>
These prepayments will be treated as <a href="real.htm">real</a> investments so those<br/>
End-<a href="user.htm">User</a>s become <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers.<br/>
<br/>
And the ROI for their risk is paid to them as at-<a href="cost.htm">cost</a> <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t instead<br/>
of trying to sell the outputs at the market with the hope of keeping<br/>
<a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> <small>(which requires scarcity)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Technology companies <small>(<a href="part.htm">part</a>icularly ones that harness the crowd)</small></span><br/>
<br/>
Crowd <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ed and Crowd *<a href="own.htm">OWN</a>ED* so each sub-venture can concentrate on<br/>
<a href="use.htm">use</a>-value, since the <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t will no longer need to be sold, but will<br/>
instead be ROI itself.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Transportation <small>(car culture isn't sustainable-- yet rail will require government-level investment)</small></span><br/>
<br/>
Community-<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ed buses and/or cabs where the potential customers are<br/>
also the sole <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers means the rides are not sold for<br/>
exchange-value, but are already under the control of those who need<br/>
those services as a result of their <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing those <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s early.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> do people have any fresh <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>as on <a href="part.htm">part</a>icular advances in these fields that can be made without major capital input first</span><br/>
<br/>
Let's think of the mundane yet unsolved issue of food.<br/>
<br/>
Growing individually <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed gardens is a distraction at best.<br/>
<br/>
When <a href="work.htm">work</a>ing alone, few if any of us can grow and process/<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>e all<br/>
that we need for the entire year.<br/>
<br/>
But even the most well-intentioned "Community Supported Agriculture"<br/>
<small>(CSA)</small> is still caught in the Capitalist mindset of keeping <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above<br/>
<a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> because the *<a href="own.htm">OWN</a>ERSHIP* of those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es is not in the<br/>
hands of the End-<a href="user.htm">User</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
We must organize "Community <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ed Agriculture" <small>(COA)</small> where those that<br/>
can prepay for their food will commit <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s to purchase the <a href="land.htm">Land</a>,<br/>
Water rights, Tools, Seeds, etc. - and those that are in need of<br/>
<a href="employ.htm">employ</a>ment can prepay by committing their labor to that endeavor.<br/>
<br/>
A COA would not sell the results at the end of the season, but divides<br/>
it among those <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers in accordance with the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> each had<br/>
invested.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
These <a href="user.htm">User</a>-<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ed <small>[ <a class="ext" href="http://P2PFoundation.net/User_Owned">http://P2PFoundation.net/User_Owned</a> ]</small> ventures do<br/>
not suffer when others succeed <small>(they do not rely upon scarcity)</small>,<br/>
because they <a href="use.htm">use</a> the directly and so never "play the <a href="game.htm">game</a>" of<br/>
attempting to keep <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-27-2010:</span> <small>[fcf_discussion]</small> US <a href="net.htm">net</a> neutrality law: What is wrong with it?<br/>
mp wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Alternatively, from that perspective, a "better" way to achieve <a href="net.htm">net</a></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> neutrality would be through an ex<a href="prop.htm">prop</a>riation of the infrastructure and a</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> handing it over to community groups to manage and maintain according to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> the visions of <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom and neutrality that have developed over the years</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> of digital com<a href="moni.htm">moni</a>ng.</span><br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> Corporations would never "hand it over" voluntarily.<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> Using government power to force a hand-over would be wrong in it's <a href="own.htm">own</a> way.<br/>
<br/>
3.)</small> Communities can simply *buy* the infrastructure away from these corporations - since those communities eventually <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for all those <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s anyway *and* <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">.</span>..<br/>
<br/>
We <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> because of our lack of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> measures our dependence upon the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers.<br/>
<br/>
When we finally awake and begin to buy the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of all of<br/>
our goods and services, then we, the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s, will be <a href="free.htm">free</a> from the<br/>
feudalists who subjugate us through <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial scarcity in their drive<br/>
to keep <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="user.htm">User</a> <a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom in the Physical <a href="real.htm">Real</a>m will be based on <a href="proper.htm">Proper</a>ty Rights<br/>
held under a "<a href="proper.htm">Proper</a>ty <a href="left.htm">Left</a>" <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>e-<a href="agree.htm">agree</a>ment that guarantees access to<br/>
Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es by treating any <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> collected <small>(because of<br/>
late-comers <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing for goods and services)</small> as an investment from the<br/>
<a href="user.htm">user</a> who paid it.<br/>
<br/>
This creates a negative-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop that allows us to grow while<br/>
auto-distributing that <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership to those who were willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for<br/>
it.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-26-2010:</span> <small>[Meta<a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ency_Project]</small> My Vision of an Open <small>(Physical)</small> <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e, <a href="use.htm">Use</a>-Value Venture<br/>
<br/>
John Robb wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> think in terms of a venture a couple of hundred thousand people could help <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> in their spare time, that would generate significant income for them in perpetuity.</span><br/>
<br/>
Let's think of 'outcome' instead of 'income'.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<a href="imag.htm">Imag</a>ine 200,000 customers pool re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es to pre-<a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for some "Physical<br/>
<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es" of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
It almost doesn't matter what the industry is, as long as those<br/>
<a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ers can <a href="use.htm">use</a> those <a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ectives directly.<br/>
<br/>
The ROI for this type of investment is at-<a href="cost.htm">cost</a> <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t instead of<br/>
<a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e-above-<a href="cost.htm">cost</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>. It is truly a <a href="use.htm">use</a>-value venture.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
For example, say a group of customers of raw-milk pool their $ and/or<br/>
labor to purchase and/or <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d a dairy.<br/>
<br/>
Each person invests <small>(whether with <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y or with labor)</small> the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a><br/>
required for them to receive the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t they intend to<br/>
consume.<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t is never sold since it already belongs to those who will <a href="use.htm">use</a> it.<br/>
<br/>
When each consumer/<a href="own.htm">own</a>er arrives at the dairy to get milk, they do not<br/>
buy it from the group, but are simply receiving the % that they<br/>
already <a href="own.htm">own</a> as a result of their <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es<br/>
<small>(the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es in this case is the <a href="land.htm">Land</a>, Water-rights, Cattle,<br/>
feedlot, milking <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines, etc.)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
As another example: <a href="imag.htm">imag</a>ine co-owing the material assets of a<br/>
cell-phone <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Attract 1/2 million potential phone/internet customers to pre-<a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for<br/>
such services.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="use.htm">Use</a> those <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s to buy, <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d and operate those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>off is that we "avoid <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>" instead of trying to<br/>
collect <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> from others.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
This explains the '<a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic' case.<br/>
<br/>
The 'dynamic' case - where customers are entering and leaving the<br/>
group - will be explained later.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-20-2010:</span> <a href="title.htm">Title</a> <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>a: Carrier, Provider,<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-20-2010:</span> To P2PNet<a href="work.htm">work</a> <a href="mail.htm">mail</a>ing list<br/>
Michel Bauwens wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> if we are creating the value, why is it that</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> neither governance nor financial benefits flow to us ...</span><br/>
<br/>
Because we won't <a href="own.htm">own</a> the physical infrastructure, of course.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> such re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es have both a commodity aspect <small>(selling attention)</small>, a</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> governance aspect <small>(who controls the platform)</small>, and a <a href="know.htm">know</a>ledge commons</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> aspect <small>(the community of <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipants creating universally available shared</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="know.htm">know</a>ledge)</small>.</span><br/>
<br/>
The "community of <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipants" could easily control the platform if<br/>
they would take the burden of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership upon their collective<br/>
selves...<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> to shortly answer the public/commons aspect: my feeling is that commons</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly means, belongs to all, as opposed to the public, which means, belongs</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> to a separate entity that claims to represent all ..</span><br/>
<br/>
I <a href="agree.htm">agree</a> this is a delicate and <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>icult to describe <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a>iation.<br/>
<br/>
How about a small group that buys Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es needed to host such<br/>
<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, but has a policy which guarantees all late-comers also<br/>
gain <a href="real.htm">real</a> <small>(divisible)</small> <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-17-2010:</span> <a href="title.htm">Title</a> <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>a: Culture Host, Hosting Culture<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-17-2010:</span> To P2PNet<a href="work.htm">work</a> <a href="mail.htm">mail</a>ing list<br/>
<br/>
M. Fioretti wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Patrick Anderson wrote:</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> But instead of facing the problem of co-owing Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es, we</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> are told by Eben Moglen, Ric<a href="hard.htm">hard</a> <a href="stallman.htm">Stallman</a> and many others that each</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> of us must <a href="own.htm">own</a> these things in *absolute isolation* to retain</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> <a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> at least Moglen says we should "in isolation" as you say, our <a href="own.htm">own</a></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> physical servers, but I <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly don't think or got the impression that</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> he tought we could do without a common, centralized, physical telecom</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> infrastructure.</span><br/>
<br/>
Ok, so we need a "physical telecom infrastructure", but then *WHO* should have control of those Material Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion?<br/>
<br/>
Should it be some Wall-Street moguls who intend to subjugate us?<br/>
<br/>
Should it be the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>ers who <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d, <a href="install.htm">install</a>, maintain and improve them?<br/>
<br/>
Should it be the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s who, in the end, <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for all of those <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s - and usually more <small>(when they <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>)</small>?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> We, the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s, will need collectively purchase and/or <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d and then</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> the material infrastructure that our ISPs and Cell-Phone</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> providers hold against us before we can finally have any <a href="real.htm">real</a> say in</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> how those <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>s are governed.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> Personally, JUST BECAUSE the material infrastructure is very material,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> very big, very expensive and very polluting to duplicate, in general I</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly don't like <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>osals of <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>ding complete, alternative</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>s. Much better, much more efficient and much more</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> environmentally sound to reform control of what already exist, IMO.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<br/>
We can reform and gain control through <a href="own.htm">OWN</a>ERSHIP. <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ers have absolute dominion!<br/>
<br/>
We, the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s, *already* <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s of those <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>s. And we also <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> the burden of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
So let us gather together to purchase those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es *away* from the tyrants that <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently subjugate us in their drive to keep <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Could you tell me any disadvantages to such an approach?<br/>
<br/>
Are we just frightened?<br/>
<br/>
Is it simply that we lack the <a href="skill.htm">skill</a>s to organize?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
If we, the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s could organize to <a href="own.htm">own</a> the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of all <a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ectives we seek, would it be a better way, or would there be no <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence?<br/>
<br/>
Does it not seem profound that we could then *ignore* those who want to stop us from achieving our goals?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-17-2010:</span> To P2PNet<a href="work.htm">work</a> <a href="mail.htm">mail</a>ing list<br/>
Software is only one half of the equation.<br/>
<br/>
What about the <a href="hard.htm">Hard</a>ware needed to run the Software and to <a href="stor.htm">Stor</a>e the data?<br/>
<br/>
How can Peers cluster around shared <a href="hard.htm">Hard</a>ware to Host the <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> services we need and want?<br/>
<br/>
Of course you can say "No problem, I'll just host it on my server and you can all <a href="use.htm">use</a> it.".<br/>
<br/>
But then what assurance do we have that those services will continue into the future?<br/>
<br/>
How do we <a href="know.htm">know</a> you won't slowly run out of <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y and the care needed to maintain those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es?<br/>
<br/>
How do we <a href="know.htm">know</a> you won't become 'evil' as Google claimed it never would?<br/>
<br/>
How can we collectively <a href="fund.htm">fund</a> and <a href="own.htm">own</a> those Material Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion so we can <a href="protect.htm">protect</a> ourselves from any single individual or subgroup?<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-16-2010:</span> To P2PNet<a href="work.htm">work</a> <a href="mail.htm">mail</a>ing list<br/>
Samuel Rose wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> It seems to me that a good long-term option for people that cannot do</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> their <a href="own.htm">own</a> system <a href="admin.htm">admin</a>istration would be to create a cooperative-run</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> datacenter <small>(or datacenters)</small>.</span><br/>
<br/>
Who would <small>(optimally)</small> be the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of such a datacenter?<br/>
<br/>
Should the customers gather together to <a href="fund.htm">fund</a> and <a href="own.htm">own</a> it themselves?<br/>
<br/>
Or should the <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers who <a href="install.htm">install</a> and maintain it <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for that <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty?<br/>
<br/>
I'm just talking strategically - what is the best arrangement?<br/>
<br/>
Or maybe <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership doesn't matter at all?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-15-2010:</span> To Info@<a class="ext" href="http://UrbanEco.org">UrbanEco.org</a><br/>
Green is not enough.<br/>
<br/>
We must <a href="install.htm">install</a> *manufacturing* plants that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>e the raw materials<br/>
needed for the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion of food, <a href="soap.htm">soap</a>, clothing, etc.<br/>
<br/>
Concentrate on Trees, but <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e them *gifting* trees. Especially<br/>
valuable would be Avocado, Olive, and Nut trees.<br/>
<br/>
Also think of the <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e for herbs and spices in the local market.<br/>
Many such small plants grow very easily.<br/>
<br/>
Plant that which we NEED, not just ornamentals!<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-12-2010:</span> To a private list<br/>
I like this kind of sarcastic humour <small>(6 minutes)</small><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peX4dBEF0Vg">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peX4dBEF0Vg</a><br/>
<br/>
A somewhat related movie <small>(2 hours)</small><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U71-KsDArFM">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U71-KsDArFM</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-11-2010:</span> To P2PNet<a href="work.htm">work</a> <a href="mail.htm">mail</a>ing list<br/>
If the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s are the <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ers, how will <a class="ext" href="http://TheConnective.net">TheConnective.net</a> avoid <a href="work.htm">work</a>er exploitation?<br/>
<br/>
Many would say the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>ers should <a href="own.htm">own</a> the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion, or at least have <a href="part.htm">part</a>ial <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership.<br/>
<br/>
Does that mean private <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership of devices such as the Plug<a href="compu.htm">Compu</a>ter must be shared with those who manufacture, configure and/or maintain those devices?<br/>
<br/>
I'm talking about strategy.<br/>
<br/>
We need to discover a better road so we show others that direction.<br/>
<br/>
We can't just continue waiting on the sidelines observing others as they ignorantly destroy our planet.<br/>
<br/>
It *DOES* matter what we think they should do.<br/>
<br/>
They <small>(the collective We)</small> need <a href="gui.htm">gui</a>dance because we are <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently doing it very, very WRONG.<br/>
<br/>
Michel Bauwens wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> I only have a problem with posing <a href="user.htm">user</a>-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ership,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> which excludes <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers, as universal solution,</span><br/>
<br/>
Ok, so the question is: Will creating a Citizen-<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ed Internet<br/>
exclude <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers in the way you <a href="imag.htm">imag</a>ine, or maybe it just doesn't apply<br/>
in this situation?<br/>
<br/>
I'm sincerely not sure what this means nor how to solve this exact issue.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-07-2010:</span> <a class="ext" href="http://COTW.cc">COTW.cc</a> <span class="quot2">>>Coalition of the Willing</span><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-03-2010:</span><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://CSPP.Oekonux.org">CSPP.Oekonux.org</a> <span class="quot2">>>Critical Studies in Peer <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion <small>(CSPP)</small> seeks high-quality contributions from researchers and practitioners of peer <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion. We understand peer <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion as a <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>e of commons-based and oriented <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion in which <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipation is voluntary and predicated on the self-selection of tasks. Notable examples are the <a href="collab.htm">collab</a>orative development of <a href="free.htm">Free</a> Software projects and of the Wikipedia online encyclopedia. Through the analysis of the forms, operations, and con<a href="trad.htm">trad</a>ictions of peer <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ing communities in contemporary capitalist society, the journal aims to open up <a href="new.htm">new</a> perspectives on the implications of peer <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion for social change.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-03-2010:</span> Response to Ben<br/>
Subject: "Garden A Feedin"<br/>
My <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>as complement and extend yours in these ways:<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> Allow you to target businesses and governments that are interested in the <a href="land.htm">land</a>scaping and an appearance of goodness <small>(helping the needy)</small>, but otherwise have no <a href="use.htm">use</a> of those outputs.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> Help <a href="insur.htm">insur</a>e a more continued <a href="employ.htm">employ</a>ment through Service Contracts.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> Help you and your business avoid government interference and lower your tax liability by receiving a portion of your income as the outputs themselves which you would then <a href="use.htm">use</a> directly. This is a form of <a href="imput.htm">Imput</a>ed <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion that <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>es you appear less wealthy than you <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly are - since there are then no numbers to report.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h3">===Target Markets</span><br/>
Businesses should not be overlooked, as they have large budgets and are always looking for a way to improve the <small>(mostly false)</small> notion that they care about something besides themselves.<br/>
<br/>
You can take advantage of those Public Relations <small>(PR)</small> <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s by helping to expose their contribution to the Greater-Good when they allow you to <a href="use.htm">use</a> their <a href="land.htm">land</a> and water to help Feed the Hungry through Local <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
This similarly applies to mid and high income households that would like to appear more 'green' to their neighbors, but do not have the time or will to deal with those 'manufacturing' plants themselves.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Here is the approach in rough form:<br/>
A.)</small> We will <a href="install.htm">install</a> beautiful yet <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tive plants for approximately the same <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e as non-<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tive plants.<br/>
<br/>
B.)</small> We will optionally contract with you to tend those plants and harvest the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts in perpetutity at NO <a href="cost.htm">COST</a> to you except we will retain some % of that harvest as <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment.<br/>
<br/>
C.)</small> We will optionally process and <a href="stor.htm">stor</a>e your % at NO <a href="cost.htm">COST</a> to you except we will retain some further % of that harvest as <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment.<br/>
<br/>
D.)</small> We will optionally prepare your % into advanced solutions, even fully prepared meals at NO <a href="cost.htm">COST</a> to you except we will retain some % further of that harvest as <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h3">===Vertical Integration</span><br/>
As you gain more of these <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t-as-<a href="pay.htm">Pay</a>ment Service Contracts, you will finally have more output than you or your <a href="employ.htm">employ</a>ees can <a href="use.htm">use</a> directly.<br/>
<br/>
At that point, you can begin using these raw materials as the inputs of other businesses such as creating Olive-oil, Almond-milk, Nut-based nutrition bars, etc.<br/>
<br/>
Later, you can even open restaurants supplied by those outputs.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h3">===Business Orientation</span><br/>
Because of the nature of your endeavor, a carefully written "Mission <a href="stat.htm">Stat</a>ement" will qualify you as non-<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
This would have NO EFFECT on the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> of <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y you or your <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers can keep as reward, it only requires you call those rewards *Wages* instead of *<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>* - it is a simple matter of book-keeping.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h3">===General <a href="ide.htm">Ide</a>as</span><br/>
For trees, concentrate on high-oil <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts such as Avacado, Olive, Nut - as they are much more valuable <small>(both nutritionally and <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>tarily)</small> than fruit.<br/>
<br/>
For small plants, don't forget spices and herbs, which are usually easy to grow, yet very expensive at the market.<br/>
<br/>
Off-the-shelf dog houses might be a simple basis for small Chicken shelters.<br/>
<br/>
Don't forget Bee Hives - informing potential customers of <a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_collapse_disorder">http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_collapse_disorder</a> to increase their moral imperative.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h3">===Advertising and Online Presence</span><br/>
Don't spend any <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y on a <a href="web.htm">web</a>site unless you are sure you cannot meet your needs for <a href="free.htm">free</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://BlogSpot.com">BlogSpot.com</a> and <a class="ext" href="http://Blogger.com">Blogger.com</a> are likely sufficient for your blogging needs, and are <a href="free.htm">free</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://GooglePages.com">GooglePages.com</a> can be <a href="use.htm">use</a>d if you need more control over the page layout.<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://LinkedIn.com">LinkedIn.com</a> is also <a href="free.htm">free</a> and will add to your credibility.<br/>
<br/>
You might be able to advertise online for <a href="free.htm">free</a> if you qualify as a non-<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h3">===Minor Details</span><br/>
The name is fun, but the word "Garden" may do more harm than good, as it conjures the all-too-familiar <a href="pic.htm">pic</a>ture of labor-intense, messy, and mostly un<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tive plots that must be hidden from view.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-03-2010:</span> Following the development of Las Indias' Phyle and the P2P-CoOp<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://LasIndias.net/indianopedia/Community">LasIndias.net/indianopedia/Community</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Pad.TeleComix.org/p2pconstitution">Pad.TeleComix.org/p2pconstitution</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Lists.OurProject.org/pipermail/p2p-coop">Lists.OurProject.org/pipermail/p2p-coop</a><br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://FrancoIacomella.org/p2p/doku.php">FrancoIacomella.org/p2p/doku.php</a> <a href="user.htm">user</a>: patrick_anderson<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Dec-01-2010:</span> Noticed <a class="ext" href="http://MuniNetworks.org/content/community-broadband-preemption-map">MuniNetworks.org/content/community-broadband-preemption-map</a><br/>
<span class="quot">"'Eighteen <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>es in the U.S. have enacted barriers to either <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e it <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>icult or impossible for communities to <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d publicly-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ed <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>s. The <a href="map.htm">map</a> below displays <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>es with barriers based on our analysis of whether they have an outright ban, a de facto ban, or various barriers to communities <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing this essential infrastructure.'"</span><br/>
</p>
<p class='footer'>
Page generated from <a href=".text/diary-dec-2010">diary-dec-2010</a> by <a href=".code/etym.el">etym</a>.</p>
</body>
</html>