-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
diary-jan-2011.htm
843 lines (840 loc) · 73.4 KB
/
diary-jan-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
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
<?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-jan-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">Jan-20-2011:</span> <br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://diyFractional.net">diyFractional.net</a> <a class="ext" href="http://GetItWithMe.com">GetItWithMe.com</a> <a class="ext" href="http://e-Allocator.com">e-Allocator.com</a> <a class="ext" href="http://U-Reserve-It.com">U-Reserve-It.com</a> <a class="ext" href="http://ShareZen.com">ShareZen.com</a><br/>
<br/>
Calendaring, scheduling and reservations are surprisingly <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>amental to community <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>ding.<br/>
<br/>
conflict<br/>
allocate<br/>
sharing<br/>
visibility<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Shareable.net/blog/how-to-manage-usage-of-a-shared-asset">Shareable.net/blog/how-to-manage-usage-of-a-shared-asset</a><br/>
<span class="quot">"'<br/>
1. It should be easy for everyone involved to keep track of who's using the asset when.<br/>
This is kind of a no-brainer. Without this, you have utter chaos. <a href="part.htm">Part</a>ners should be made aware when someone reserves the asset, and there should be some centralized mechanism for <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners to see when the asset is reserved and when it's available next.<br/>
<br/>
2. The system should prevent <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners from scheduling over each other.<br/>
Another no-brainer. It's not <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly a "reservation" if it doesn't prevent others from claiming the same time slot. Again, without this you have chaos.<br/>
<br/>
3. The system should prevent <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners from scheduling more than their share of time in advance.<br/>
Whatever system is in place should ensure that each <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner is not scheduling more usage than they're en<a href="title.htm">title</a>d to, based on their percentage of equity in the asset. Without this, an individual <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner could easily monopolize the shared asset at the expense of the other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners.<br/>
<br/>
4. The system should allow for unlimited last minute usage if the asset is available.<br/>
In the interest of <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing full <a href="use.htm">use</a> of the asset, it wouldn't <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e much sense to have it sit idle if someone is ready to jump on it at the last minute.<br/>
<br/>
5. The system should have a fair and consistent answer to the central question - "What happens if we all want to <a href="use.htm">use</a> it at the same time?"<br/>
Unless you've <a href="agree.htm">agree</a>d to a <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic schedule in advance <small>(which fails miserably at #6)</small>, there will definitely be occasions when more than one <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner wants to reserve the same time slot. The system should have a better answer than whoever gets there first wins.<br/>
<br/>
6. Bonus: The system should provide an experience that is as close as possible to sole <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership.<br/>
This is a bonus requirement because an asset-sharing <a href="part.htm">part</a>nership can be successful without it, but it can <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e a world of <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence in how much frustration comes along with the benefits of shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership. In an <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>al world, you <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for a <a href="fract.htm">fract</a>ion of an asset and you <a href="use.htm">use</a> it whenever you want or need to. You shouldn't have to plan your life around when you're going to <a href="use.htm">use</a> your asset. It should feel like you're the only <a href="own.htm">own</a>er, except when it comes time to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> the bills.<br/>
<br/>
Scheduling Approaches<br/>
<br/>
So, with these requirements in mind let's take a look at some common scheduling approaches. The options generally fall into two categories - <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic scheduling, or flexible scheduling.<br/>
<br/>
With <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic scheduling, the <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners <a href="agree.htm">agree</a> in advance to a set schedule that never changes. It might be that <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners alternate weeks, or one <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner gets weekdays and the other gets weekends. There are infinite variations, but the results are the same. You end up scheduling your life around your asset. For something like a vacation home, this approach might be suitable. You generally don't take vacations whenever the mood strikes you so planning around your <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic block of time isn't that <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>icult. For something like a car however, this is much less <a href="real.htm">real</a>istic and it <a href="start.htm">start</a>s to feel like your car <a href="own.htm">own</a>s you and not the other way around.<br/>
<br/>
With flexible scheduling, <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners are able to reserve available time without having to <a href="agree.htm">agree</a> to a fixed schedule in advance. Generally, flexible scheduling solutions provide an experience that is much closer to sole <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership. The main draw<a href="back.htm">back</a> to flexible scheduling is that it's more complicated than <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic scheduling, and if it's not done right it can lead to friction between <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners, and potentially a messy and <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>ly dissolution of the <a href="part.htm">part</a>nership.<br/>
<br/>
Flexible Scheduling Options<br/>
<br/>
There are plenty of options available to implement a flexible scheduling system, some better than others. Here are a few of the more common approaches:<br/>
<br/>
"<a href="work.htm">Work</a>ing it out"<br/>
This approach tends to be common in <a href="part.htm">part</a>nerships that are <a href="start.htm">start</a>ed between friends, and typically means that when you want to <a href="use.htm">use</a> your asset you call the other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners and let them <a href="know.htm">know</a>. If there are only two of you in your <a href="part.htm">part</a>nership and you're close friends or family, this may <a href="work.htm">work</a> out. However, this approach has the highest probability of failure and of ruining your friendship. The problem arises when another <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner says, "me too." Now what? Without a fair and consistent process for <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing decisions in these cases it comes down to whoever is the most persuasive or yells the loudest - not the shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership experience you were hoping for. This approach fails to meet any of the requirements from the above list, and should <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly be avoided.<br/>
<br/>
Google Calendar<br/>
The next step up from "<a href="work.htm">work</a>ing it out" is to <a href="use.htm">use</a> a shared Google Calendar. While this is a step in the right direction, and at least provides a way for <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners to keep track of who is using the asset when <small>(#1)</small>, it doesn't do anything to prevent <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners from scheduling over each other <small>(#2)</small>, or more than their share of time <small>(#3)</small>. It also leaves it up to the <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners to decide what happens if more than one <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner wants to reserve the same time slot <small>(#5)</small>. Granted Google Calendar is <a href="free.htm">free</a>, but it's not that much better than just "<a href="work.htm">work</a>ing it out".<br/>
<br/>
Simplistic reservation systems<br/>
There are quite a few options available when it comes to online reservation systems that are designed to simply block time for some shared re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>e. All of them provide the basics like a shared calendar <small>(#1)</small> and the blocking of time for reservations <small>(#2)</small>. Some of the better solutions will even provide quotas for each <a href="user.htm">user</a> to ensure that an individual doesn't schedule more than their share of usage in a given time period <small>(#3)</small>. However, because these systems are general purpose scheduling systems they fall short when it comes to dealing with the specifics of managing a shared asset, like distinguishing between reservations made in advance and last minute reservations <small>(#4)</small>. Finally, their approach to dealing with cases when more than one <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner wants to reserve the same time slot is first-come, first-served. While this does provide consistent results, it's far from fair. Should a <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner be able to reserve a time slot when they've already <a href="use.htm">use</a>d the asset more than anyone else simply because they woke up earlier and made their reservation first?<br/>
<br/>
Basic shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership management systems<br/>
Now we're getting closer to a <a href="work.htm">work</a>able solution. There are just a handful of applications that are targeted specifically at managing a jointly <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed asset. All of them provide reservation systems and additional features like management of finances and <a href="collab.htm">collab</a>oration features. Some are specific to a certain type of asset, like a boat or airplane, while others are customizable to <a href="work.htm">work</a> with any type of asset. Some provide just the management tools, while others go further to help potential shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers find <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners and set up their <a href="part.htm">part</a>nership. When it comes to reservations, these systems have an answer for each of the requirements. They all provide the basics <small>(#1-3)</small>, and most allow for unlimited last minute usage <small>(#4)</small>. They also have a decent answer for dealing with cases when more than one <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner wants to reserve the same time slot <small>(#5)</small>. One common solution for this requirement is wait listing. With wait listing, the first <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner to reserve a time slot is granted the reservation, but the system still collects additional reservations for that time slot and creates a waiting list. In the event that the first <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner cancels their reservation, the next <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner on the waiting list gets the time slot. This is a step in the right direction, but it's <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly just first-come, first-served with a twist that only <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>es a <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence when a <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner cancels a reservation. Another common solution is to offer <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>es or purchasing of a time slot. With this approach, the first <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner to request a time slot is still granted the reservation, but other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners can now offer to <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>e another reservation for the one in question, or can offer to purchase the time slot with either cash or <a href="virt.htm">virt</a>ual "cr<a href="edit.htm">edit</a>s". The draw<a href="back.htm">back</a> with this approach is that it puts the holder of the first reservation in the position of having to directly grant or deny another <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner's request, which can result in friction and resentment between <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners.<br/>
<br/>
Sophisticated shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership management systems<br/>
Here's where the list of options gets very short. A sophisticated system has the right answers for all of the requirements, and provides a scheduling experience that is as close as you can get to sole <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership without actually <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing for it <small>(#6)</small>. The <a href="key.htm">key</a> to doing this is how the system handles requests for the same time slot <small>(#5)</small>. A sophisticated reservation system gets away from first-come, first-served entirely and instead <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>es intelligent decisions to eliminate scheduling conflicts before they can happen. This is done by separating the reservation process into two steps. The first step is figuring out how many <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners want to <a href="use.htm">use</a> a given time slot - essentially collecting demand. This step is triggered when a <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner requests the first reservation for a given time slot. Instead of granting the reservation immediately, it is held in a pending <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>e for a short time while the system notifies the other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners of the pending reservation. Other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners who want to reserve that time slot can do so while the reservation is still pending, which triggers the next step in the process. In this step, the system <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>es an intelligent decision about who should get the time slot in question by analyzing each <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner's past and future scheduled usage. The time slot is then given to the <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner who has <a href="use.htm">use</a>d <small>(or will <a href="use.htm">use</a>)</small> the asset the least - the fairest possible outcome. Some systems will even apply a weighting factor to more recent usage to try to spread time more evenly among <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners. This two-step reservation process results in the least friction possible between <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners because it is the system that <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>es the reservation decision instead of an individual <a href="part.htm">part</a>ner. With this strategy, <a href="part.htm">part</a>ners can even go as far as giving up on scheduling reservations in advance and just reserve their asset whenever they feel the urge, relying on the system to ensure fairness. This is as close as it gets to <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the asset yourself.<br/>
<br/>
So, if you're considering shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership, or are already sharing something, <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e sure you have the right tools in place because they can have a significant impact on your shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership experience. Resist the urge to go with a <a href="free.htm">free</a> or cheap option and seriously consider going with a purpose <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>t solution. You can expect to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> a <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>est monthly fee for these services, but it's well worth it to ensure that you get the best shared <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership experience possible.<br/>
'"</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-20-2011:</span> From <a class="ext" href="http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/gplv3-clarity-a.html">http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/05/gplv3-clarity-a.html</a><br/>
<span class="quot">"'<br/>
The goal of this License is to promote the <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom of all <a href="user.htm">user</a>s to share and change <a href="free.htm">free</a> software.<br/>
<br/>
Definitions:<br/>
"You" means any individual exercising the rights granted in this License.<br/>
<br/>
The "<a href="work.htm">Work</a>" means the <a href="work.htm">work</a> of authorship distributed under this License. A "<a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a>" means any altered version of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>.<br/>
<br/>
The "<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e Code" for a <a href="work.htm">Work</a> means the preferred form of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> for <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ifications to it. "<a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ect Code" means any non-<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>e form of a <a href="work.htm">Work</a>.<br/>
<br/>
"Distribute" means copying a <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a>, <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>ing it available to the public, and enabling other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ies to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e or receive copies. It does not mean sublicensing.<br/>
<br/>
Permissions:<br/>
1)</small> You may <a href="use.htm">use</a> the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>, without limitation.<br/>
<br/>
2)</small> You may Distribute the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> as <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e Code, provided that you:<br/>
a)</small> <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> available under this License,<br/>
b)</small> retain all of the copyright notices and warranty disclaimers of the original <a href="work.htm">Work</a> unchanged in the distribution, and<br/>
c)</small> provide to the <a href="user.htm">user</a> any information necessary to <a href="install.htm">install</a> <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ified versions from the <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e Code.<br/>
<br/>
3)</small> You may Distribute a <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a> as <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e Code, provided that you prominently <a href="note.htm">note</a> the changes you made and provided that you satisfy the requirements of <a href="sect.htm">sect</a>ion 2.<br/>
<br/>
4)</small> You may Distribute a <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a> as <a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ect Code, provided that you satisfy the requirements of <a href="sect.htm">sect</a>ions 2 or 3, and provided that you <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e the corresponding <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e Code available to the <a href="user.htm">user</a> under this License.<br/>
<br/>
5)</small> You may charge any <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e or no <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e for each <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a> that you Distribute, and you may offer support or warranty <a href="protect.htm">protect</a>ion for a fee.<br/>
<br/>
6)</small> Aggregation of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> with other separate and independent <a href="work.htm">work</a>s on a volume of <a href="stor.htm">stor</a>age or distribution medium does not cause this License to apply to those other separate and independent <a href="part.htm">part</a>s of the aggregate.<br/>
<br/>
7)</small> You are not permitted to Distribute the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a> in a way that denies the <a href="user.htm">user</a>s any of the rights granted in this license. You are not permitted to impose a fee for the rights granted in this license. You are not permitted to limit operation or <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ification of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a> as a means of enforcing your legal rights or the legal rights of any third <a href="part.htm">part</a>y against any <a href="user.htm">user</a>s of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a>.<br/>
<br/>
8)</small> By <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ifying or Distributing the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a>, you indicate your acceptance of this License, and all its terms and conditions. You may contact the copyright holder of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> directly and arrange terms to <a href="use.htm">use</a>, distribute, or <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ify the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> other than those of this License.<br/>
<br/>
9)</small> Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-<a href="free.htm">free</a> patent license under the contributor's patent claims in its contribution, to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e, <a href="use.htm">use</a>, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ify and <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>agate the contribution.<br/>
<br/>
Termination:<br/>
10)</small> The permission granted by this License to distribute or <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ify the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> will terminate if you bring a legal action for infringement of any patent claim licensable by you that is applicable to any element of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or any <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a>, against anyone based on their <a href="use.htm">use</a>, <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ification or distribution of the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> or a <a href="mod.htm">Mod</a>ified <a href="work.htm">Work</a>.<br/>
<br/>
11)</small> The permissions granted under this License cannot be terminated as long as you are in compliance with this License. If you violate this License, and you do not correct the violation and return to compliance within 30 days after receiving notice of the violation from the copyright holder, the permissions will terminate as of the end of the 30 day period.<br/>
<br/>
Warranty and Liability:<br/>
12)</small> There is no warranty for the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>, to the extent permitted by applicable law. Unless otherwise <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ed in writing, the copyright holders and/or other <a href="part.htm">part</a>ies provide the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> "as is" and without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, and the excluded warranties include without limitation implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a <a href="part.htm">part</a>icular purpose.<br/>
<br/>
13)</small> Unless required by applicable law or <a href="agree.htm">agree</a>d to in writing by a copyright holder, in no event will any copyright holder, or any other <a href="part.htm">part</a>y who may <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ify and/or distribute the <a href="work.htm">Work</a> under this License, be liable to you for damages, including any general, special, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the <a href="use.htm">use</a> or inability to <a href="use.htm">use</a> the <a href="work.htm">Work</a>, even if such holder or other <a href="part.htm">part</a>y has been advised of the possibility of such damages.<br/>
'"</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-18-2011:</span> To <a class="ext" href="http://Quora.com/What-is-the-origin-of-profit">Quora.com/What-is-the-origin-of-profit</a><br/>
In other words, why do Consumers <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> more for <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts than the <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s to <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>e them <small>(where Wages are also a <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>)</small>?<br/>
<br/>
If you and your neighbors <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ed a small dairy, you would need to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s, including Wages.<br/>
<br/>
But for any milk you <a href="use.htm">use</a> directly, there is no <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> because there was no sale...<br/>
<br/>
Does that mean <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> arises from the Consumer's lack of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion?<br/>
<a href="edit.htm">Edit</a><br/>
<br/>
I am not asking whether <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is a 'fair' or 'moral'. I am thinking in a much more mechanical and blameless way about what causes this <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence between <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e and <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
I'm just noticing that when the <a href="own.htm">own</a>er of a Milk Cow drinks some of that milk - even if he hired someone else to milk the cow - then, even though he had to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all of the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, he simply *cannot* <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> because he did not buy the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t. <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is appa<a href="rent.htm">rent</a>ly *undefined* in this case.<br/>
<br/>
This seems to show that <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is caused by the consumer's lack of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
And so eliminating <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> <small>(whether that is a good <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>a or not)</small> can be achieved by consumers choosing to invest in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion for that which they can <a href="use.htm">use</a> directly.<br/>
<br/>
I'm somewhat surprised by this discovery, as I was under the impression that <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> was the result of <a href="work.htm">work</a>er efforts...<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Quora.com/Eric-Fair">Quora.com/Eric-Fair</a> wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> there is a higher Opportunity <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> for not drinking his <a href="own.htm">own</a> farm's milk.</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> I likely <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> a higher <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e than the dairy farmer who's drinking his <a href="own.htm">own</a> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t, but I don't have to deal with management/sales of the excess <a href="inventory.htm">inventory</a> of milk that I won't consume myself</span><br/>
<br/>
Being able to buy exactly as much as I need/want of the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t without any other ancillary issues has value to me <small>(and most other consumers, it seems)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-18-2011:</span> <small>[OK]</small> reciprocal altruism and timescales for <a href="collab.htm">collab</a>oration<br/>
<br/>
Tiberius Brastaviceanu wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> How do you define "<a href="cost.htm">cost</a>"?</span><br/>
<br/>
Every corporation <a href="calc.htm">calc</a>ulates the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s it<br/>
paid for <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion during <small>(for example)</small><br/>
each 1/4 of a year.<br/>
<br/>
They then report their 'earnings' <small>(<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>)</small><br/>
as the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence between those <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s and<br/>
the gross revenue they received from <a href="user.htm">user</a>s<br/>
who bought the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Is there something about that routine<br/>
procedure you would say is inaccurate?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot2">>> When the consumers are the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of the</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion, then they *already* <a href="own.htm">own</a></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> the outputs of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion even before</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> it is <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ed</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> I think we should emphasize more on</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ing stuff than on <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing stuff.</span><br/>
<br/>
You absoloutly CANNOT <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>e unless you<br/>
have access to the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
And I guarantee those Means are already<br/>
<a href="own.htm">own</a>ed by somebody or some government.<br/>
<br/>
So if you are unwilling to be an <a href="own.htm">own</a>er,<br/>
then how do you <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ose we access the<br/>
Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion? Who should <a href="own.htm">own</a><br/>
them if not the collective 'we'?<br/>
<br/>
If you say "nobody should <a href="own.htm">own</a> them"<br/>
then you have lost already because it<br/>
is <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently impossible for <a href="land.htm">land</a> and<br/>
capital to exist on the earth without<br/>
someone laying claim to it.<br/>
<br/>
If you do not lay claim to some <a href="land.htm">land</a><br/>
and capital, then what will stop those<br/>
that intend to stop us from taking<br/>
those re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es from us? What will<br/>
we say when they say "You don't <a href="own.htm">own</a><br/>
this, so I am taking it as my <a href="own.htm">own</a>"?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> my opinion, it is better to link <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership to <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipation in the</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion process <small>(innovation, design, manufacturing or distribution)</small>.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> If I understand your system <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ly, it can degenerate, because someone can</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> only acquire means of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion and never have to get involved in the</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion process, will never have to <a href="work.htm">work</a>. That's not a value-based</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> system, especially if you enable inheritance, or if you allow <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> be transferred <small>(sold)</small>. You provide the mechanism for a class of parasites to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> get formed, <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing means of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion but not doing any <a href="work.htm">work</a>. That is pure</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> capitalism! Putting your <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y to <a href="work.htm">work</a> for you, accumulation of capital</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <small>(means of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion)</small> and the possibility of capital to create capital.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> We've seen that movie already.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-18-2011:</span> <small>[OK]</small> reciprocal altruism and timescales for <a href="collab.htm">collab</a>oration<br/>
Tiberius Brastaviceanu wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> I don't think that we can eliminate</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> this concept <small>(<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>)</small> from our language.</span><br/>
<br/>
I <a href="agree.htm">agree</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is not something we can just wish away.<br/>
<br/>
But the origin of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is very misunderstood,<br/>
and so it is rarely if ever treated in a manner<br/>
that could act as the negative-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop we<br/>
need to begin stablizing our <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tive systems.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> measures Scarcity, and more specifically<br/>
it measure the Consumer's lack of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in<br/>
the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
I say we *should* charge <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> against those<br/>
who do not yet have enough <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership, for then<br/>
we can <a href="use.htm">use</a> that overpayment as *their* investment<br/>
toward more Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion which they will<br/>
then <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> - so they also, incrementally, gain<br/>
the <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership needed to <a href="protect.htm">protect</a> them<br/>
from <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing tribute <small>(<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>)</small> to others.<br/>
<br/>
Of course these <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers must continue to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a><br/>
for the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, but the concept<br/>
of <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is *undefined* when the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers are<br/>
also the consumers, for in that case the outputs<br/>
are not sold because they are already the<br/>
<a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty of those who intend to <a href="use.htm">use</a> them.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> <small>[In Romania]</small> everything on the market</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> had to be sold at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.</span><br/>
<br/>
I do not <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ose we try selling anything at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Please slow-down and listen to what I am saying.<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small><br/>
When the consumers are the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of the<br/>
Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion, then they *already* <a href="own.htm">own</a><br/>
the outputs of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion even before<br/>
it is <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ed.<br/>
<br/>
They do not *buy* the outputs from anyone<br/>
because they <a href="own.htm">own</a> them already!<br/>
<br/>
Since there is no transaction taking place<br/>
after <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, the consumers that have<br/>
sufficient <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion<br/>
receive the outputs at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> as a side-effect<br/>
of their <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of those outputs.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small><br/>
When the consumer does not yet have sufficient<br/>
<a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion, then<br/>
he must buy the outputs from someone who<br/>
has a surplus.<br/>
<br/>
In that case, I say we *should* charge <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e<br/>
above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> against those non-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ers, for that<br/>
is how we can collect the extra <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>s needed<br/>
to grow the collective.<br/>
<br/>
The only <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence I <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ose is that we treat<br/>
that overpayment as though it were an investment<br/>
from the very consumer who paid it - so that he<br/>
also gains <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership in his <a href="own.htm">own</a> <a href="part.htm">part</a> of<br/>
the collective.<br/>
<br/>
His <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership he paid for <small>(when he paid <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e<br/>
above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>)</small> will <a href="protect.htm">protect</a> him from needing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a><br/>
<a href="profit.htm">profit</a> in the future, for when he has sufficient<br/>
<a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion, he does<br/>
not buy the outputs of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, but <a href="own.htm">own</a>s<br/>
them already.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> The <a href="real.htm">real</a> problem is POWER.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> If you allow mechanisms for the accumulation</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> of power your society is doomed.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> In capitalism these mechanisms were</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> "private <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty" and "<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s"</span><br/>
<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is not a problem in itself.<br/>
<br/>
The problem is our mistreatment of <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Treating <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> as a reward for the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent<br/>
<a href="own.htm">own</a>ers, even if we try to be 'nice' about it,<br/>
is a positive-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop that increases the<br/>
wealth and power of those already on top.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> We need to create value-based organizations, meaning that value can be</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> extracted from the system ONLY in <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ortion to what one puts in,</span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s shall receive <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t instead of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
This means every inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s must also be a consumer.<br/>
<br/>
And those who arrive late must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for that which<br/>
they gain. They must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> to cover the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s of<br/>
<a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, and they must also <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> because<br/>
of their lack of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership.<br/>
<br/>
It would be against our collective best-interests<br/>
to treat <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> as a reward for the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers.<br/>
<br/>
We must instead treat that overpayment as though<br/>
that consumer had just invested for their future<br/>
so they also gain the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership needed to <a href="protect.htm">protect</a><br/>
them from those who would otherwise parasite value<br/>
away as the Capitalists ignorantly do already.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-18-2011:</span> <a href="title.htm">Title</a> <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>as: Buyer's Remorse, Patron Saint<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-18-2011:</span> To: <a class="ext" href="http://FaceBook.com/AGNUcius">FaceBook.com/AGNUcius</a><br/>
What is the origin of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>?<br/>
<br/>
If you and your neighbors <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ed a small dairy, you would need to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s, including Wages.<br/>
<br/>
But for any milk you <a href="use.htm">use</a> directly, there is no <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> because there was no sale...<br/>
<br/>
Does that mean <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> arises from the Consumer's lack of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion?<br/>
<br/>
By the way, if you think <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is created by <a href="work.htm">Work</a>er effort, then who should receive that value when robots are <a href="use.htm">use</a>d?: <a class="ext" href="http://SingularityHub.com/2010/11/16/dairy-farms-go-robotic-cows-have-never-been-happier-video">http://SingularityHub.com/2010/11/16/dairy-farms-go-robotic-cows-have-never-been-happier-video</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Robin Green wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> It depends if the neighbourhood pools all its</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> significant <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty <small>(and hence is a commune)</small>.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> If it does, there is presumably no <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> involved in internal <a href="use.htm">use</a>, and hence no <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>.</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> But if your <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty is a distinct thing from</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> the <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty <small>(if any)</small> <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed by "the community dairy",</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> then there might be a transfer of <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <small>(in <a href="part.htm">part</a>icular, <a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y)</small> from the former to the latter.</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Then, there might or might not be a <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>, to be reinvested.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> In general you can't prevent that,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> because the "true" <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s might not be <a href="know.htm">know</a>n at the same time as the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment.</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> In other words, to eliminate <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>, you have to eliminate <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>e</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <small>(which is sort of the Marxist view)</small>.</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> As for robots, they, like all other non-human</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers on this planet, do not need to be paid,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> so the <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers who <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d, maintain and operate</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> them should be paid instead.</span><br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> The "intellectual <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty" behind the robots is an interesting case because that can be - in principle - given away <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>-<a href="free.htm">free</a>. But then voluntary <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ments could be made to programmers, designers, engineers etc.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-17-2011:</span> <br/>
Phil Driver wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> Many of us are prepared to "give it a go" and donate our time/<a href="mone.htm">mone</a>y to what</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> appears to be a good cause but we all expect something <a href="back.htm">back</a> <small>(directly or,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> increasingly, indirectly)</small> from that contribution - within some period of</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> time <small>(likely to be days, maybe weeks, but probably not much longer)</small>.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<br/>
When I am unsure how to reason about how a <a href="part.htm">part</a> of the 'corrected'<br/>
system might function, I resort to the "stranded is<a href="land.htm">land</a>er" approach<br/>
and then incrementally scale-up from there.<br/>
<br/>
For example, If a person were stranded and alone on an is<a href="land.htm">land</a>, what<br/>
could he possibly 'invest' in, and what would that even mean?<br/>
<br/>
Let's say the only "manufacturing plants" available to him are some<br/>
coconut trees, which are luckily already <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ing for him, but he<br/>
wants to more fully <a href="insur.htm">insur</a>e his future...<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
So first of all we need to determine just *what* he could possibly <a href="use.htm">use</a><br/>
to invest.<br/>
<br/>
Well, it seems to me there are 2 <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>amentally <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> types of<br/>
investments which he can 'commit':<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> The <a href="promis.htm">promis</a>e to labor in the future toward accomplishing some goal.<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> The 'Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es' that must be dedicated to this goal <small>(such<br/>
as some square-feet of <a href="land.htm">land</a>, some coconuts which he will plant instead<br/>
of eating directly, some fresh water, etc.)</small><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
bleh... sorry if this is too boring - I'm trying to answer the<br/>
question of "how long must we wait before some investment <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>s-out?".<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
So my answer is: The <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>out time and quantity and quality for any<br/>
investment should, <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>ally, be bound directly to the *type* of thing<br/>
it is because we should be organizing <a href="user.htm">user</a>s to invest into <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion<br/>
for the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>off of <a href="use.htm">Use</a>-Value - in that they can <a href="use.htm">use</a> the *Outputs*<br/>
instead of relying upon <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itional inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s who intend to collect<br/>
<a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> <small>(<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
This <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>es the system less complex and therefore much easier to<br/>
predict, but also 'solves' the conflict between Customer and Vendor<br/>
relations because the Customer *IS* the Vendor.<br/>
<br/>
This is sufficient for the '<a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic' case where the number of<br/>
inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>/consumers and the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> they invested is exactly the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a><br/>
needed for them to receive the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t they predicted they<br/>
would want or need.<br/>
<br/>
To solve the 'dynamic' case where there is surplus <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t, we must<br/>
have a legally binding Social Contract that says "All <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of<br/>
Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es can keep all the <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t they <a href="own.htm">own</a> as a result of<br/>
their <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es, but if that <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t is instead<br/>
sold to those outside of the coalition, then we should:<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> Charge <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> <small>(<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>)</small> for as much as the market will bear.<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> Treat any <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> collected as an investment from the consumer who<br/>
paid it toward even more Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es - so that every <a href="user.htm">user</a> becomes<br/>
a <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>er in <a href="collab.htm">collab</a>orative <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
This will also finally allow us to break our addiction to Scarcity,<br/>
since treating <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as a reward for the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers has been a<br/>
Positive-Feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop that incents the creation of <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial<br/>
scarcity in the drive to perpetuate the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence between <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e and<br/>
<a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Alex Rollin wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Would you mind elaborating on "legally binding"</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> in terms of "socially enforceable".</span><br/>
<br/>
What I <a href="imag.htm">imag</a>ine is <a href="start.htm">start</a>ing a business that draws up a "Terms of<br/>
Operation" for that organization enforcing the condition I mentioned.<br/>
<br/>
I get the impression it is common practice for corporations to have<br/>
this type of document they can <a href="use.htm">use</a> to stay 'on track' when it comes to<br/>
various things, including the treatment of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Unfortunately, I am not <a href="real.htm">real</a>ly the "business <a href="start.htm">start</a>ing" sort of guy,<br/>
and so have still not <a href="start.htm">start</a>ed even the smallest endeavor.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> I was having a conversation about "foreclosure on</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> collateralized assets" today and it rubbed me the wrong way. I</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> understand "legally binding", in general, though due diligence shows</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> that this is a power <a href="game.htm">game</a> fraught with asymmetry.</span><br/>
<br/>
I see what you mean, but notice the case I am <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>osing is<br/>
specifically asymmetric *against* those that have the upper-hand.<br/>
<br/>
In other words, the group of consuming-inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s would voluntarily<br/>
"tie their hands" against taking advantage of late-comers. The only<br/>
way I <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently see how we could effectively do this would be through<br/>
a legally-binding document that applies the inner-<a href="work.htm">work</a>ings of that<br/>
institution.<br/>
<br/>
This is analogous to what the <a href="gnu.htm">GNU</a> <a href="gpl.htm">GPL</a> does when it <a href="use.htm">use</a>s Copyright in a<br/>
sort of '<a href="back.htm">back</a>ward' manner as Copy<a href="left.htm">left</a>. The <a href="gnu.htm">GNU</a> <a href="gpl.htm">GPL</a> is only<br/>
operationally effective because it is *legally binding*.<br/>
<br/>
We cannot rely upon good behavior for enforcement, for those that<br/>
intend to capsize the commons do not respect such morays.<br/>
<br/>
You might think of what I <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>ose will be using <a href="proper.htm">Proper</a>ty Rights in a<br/>
'<a href="back.htm">back</a>ward' manner as <a href="proper.htm">Proper</a>ty <a href="left.htm">Left</a> which needs some sort of 'teeth'<br/>
into the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent system just as the <a href="gnu.htm">GNU</a> <a href="gpl.htm">GPL</a> - somewhat paradoxically -<br/>
has no stance without the Copyright system to hold those corporations<br/>
in check that would otherwise try to pirate-away that which the<br/>
community has <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>t.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> It's cheaper to do</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> this with social relations, and it may be the only way.</span><br/>
<br/>
I don't understand how we can keep the wolves at the door through<br/>
wishful thinking and the tears they will not heed.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> Can we construct <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty as a social relation such that enforcement</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> results in something like "diminishing equity over time" in the form</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> of "access to <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> +" as a social function of necessity</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> instead of relying on law?</span><br/>
<br/>
Small groups often want to "do the right thing", but as we scale to a<br/>
size of any significance, the nature of the beast will take hold of<br/>
the operation and find and endless number of reasons that <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> must<br/>
instead be <a href="use.htm">use</a>d by those already in charge to <a href="fund.htm">fund</a> projects they have<br/>
decided must be created for the benefit of the late-comers they pretend<br/>
to help.<br/>
<br/>
It is not that any one person even needs to have the slightest of poor<br/>
intentions. Every <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipant would likely be convinced they are<br/>
trying their <a href="hard.htm">hard</a>est to accomplish the best of goals.<br/>
<br/>
But this is the same disease that inflicts every government down even<br/>
to the city level. The <a href="real.htm">real</a> <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership is not distributed, and so the<br/>
citizens in need of the goods and services are at the mercy of a<br/>
handful of well-intending tyrants that cannot let go of the control<br/>
they have gained.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot2">>></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> 1.)</small> Charge <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> <small>(<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>)</small> for as much as the market will bear.</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> 2.)</small> Treat any <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> collected as an investment from the consumer who</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> paid it toward even more Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es - so that every <a href="user.htm">user</a> becomes</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> a <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>er in <a href="collab.htm">collab</a>orative <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> I've been walking through the "social contract" that a customer 'must'</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> uphold, RandR, to claim their share. Also an interesting place to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> look at social approaches and <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipation instead of simply risk and</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> liability management.</span><br/>
<br/>
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-17-2011:</span> <a href="imput.htm">Imput</a>ed <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion<br/>
<br/>
Abundance creates peace.<br/>
Scarcity creates <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Investment creates risk.<br/>
<br/>
Seeking <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> incents scarcity.<br/>
<br/>
When consumers <a href="own.htm">own</a> <a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es, <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ects are not sold.<br/>
When <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ects are not sold, <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> does not occur.<br/>
<br/>
There is no need to sell <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ects when they are already the <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty of those who will <a href="use.htm">use</a> them.<br/>
<br/>
Overaccumulation is the result of treating <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as a reward for those who are already organized.<br/>
<br/>
<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership can be automatically distributed to those willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for it by treating that overpayment as an investment from the consumer who paid it so they also gain <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in some Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
Growth must be 'reflected' <a href="back.htm">back</a> to those willing who <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for that growth.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-14-2011:</span> <Coalition> Systems and <a href="net.htm">Net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> Theory<br/>
<span class="quot">> - thinking as a species</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> - thinking as one, as a whole, as a single organism!</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> - systems for the whole humanity</span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, we must be more holistic and inclusive, but in a tactical and even 'defensive' manner similar to how the <a href="gnu.htm">GNU</a> <a href="gpl.htm">GPL</a> <a href="protect.htm">protect</a>s a community from outside predation...<br/>
<br/>
With that in mind, let me present some of my findings of a surprisingly simple Organizational Form that has always been available but lying dormant and unused - maybe because the <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itional ways of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion have until recently been sufficient and had not caused nearly the trouble we see now.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
This is a rough draft, but I need to send it now, as I have delayed too long already...<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
----<br/>
<br/>
Capitalism has achieved much for humanity, but as any business scales in size it becomes clear the goals of that body conflicts with the goals of those it claims to serve.<br/>
<br/>
As society becomes more aware of these troubles, corporations try to hide their goal of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> because we understand Scarcity keeps <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>, and therefore striving to perpetuate <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is the very basis of the conflict between <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion and Consumption.<br/>
<br/>
It may seem there could be no solution since those who <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itionally <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a> <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion demand <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as a Return for the Risk they take. They are operating under the paradigm of "Exchange Value" which requires some a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> of scarcity to keep <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">.</span>..<br/>
<br/>
Let's re-examine our assumptions about who should <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a> and therefore <a href="own.htm">Own</a> the Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
Let's look at the most trivial case of a single person <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing a fruit tree for his <a href="own.htm">own</a> benefit.<br/>
<br/>
He must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership, including Wages if he does not do the <a href="work.htm">work</a> himself.<br/>
<br/>
But he cannot <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> *more* than <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>, for who would he <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> it to?<br/>
<br/>
<a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is defined as <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> but if he does not sell the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t, <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is undefined.<br/>
<br/>
So he <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a>ed that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion and <a href="own.htm">Own</a>s those means for the expected return of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t instead of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>. This was "<a href="use.htm">Use</a> Value" <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion instead of "Exchange Value". It does not benefit this <a href="own.htm">own</a>er when other orc<a href="hard.htm">hard</a>s fail in the area unless he resorts to selling that which he would have eaten.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">.</span>..<br/>
<br/>
This is all very obvious and might seem unimportant, but let's push the <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>a a bit further and see what happens:<br/>
<br/>
<a href="imag.htm">Imag</a>ine now, instead of a single <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a>er-<a href="own.htm">Own</a>er-<a href="user.htm">User</a>, we have thousands of such inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s pooling <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a>s toward an orc<a href="hard.htm">hard</a>.<br/>
<br/>
By attracting potential <a href="user.htm">User</a>s to pre-<a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for the goods they predict they will need, we can <a href="use.htm">use</a> those <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a>s to buy the means necessary for that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="user.htm">User</a>s and <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ers will then be the very same set. The <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t will not be sold because the ROI for the Risk is <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t itself which they attain at <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">.</span>..<br/>
<br/>
This solves the '<a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic' case where the number of <a href="user.htm">User</a>s matches exactly the output of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
But many of these consuming inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s will want to over-<a href="own.htm">own</a> by some percentage to guarantee they have enough <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t at the round of each <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
We must do something with that surplus or it will rot.<br/>
<br/>
We can sell those <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts for <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a> - as much as the market will bear - but to keep the organization <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed by the <a href="user.htm">User</a>s of those <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ts, we must treat the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment of <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as an investment from the <a href="user.htm">User</a> who paid it so they also gain <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">.</span>...<br/>
<br/>
In the attached <a href="pic.htm">pic</a>ture "Capitalism.png" we see inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s in the upper-<a href="left.htm">left</a> corner <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ing <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion and receiving <a href="title.htm">Title</a> to those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
All <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s, including <a href="work.htm">Work</a>er wages, are initially paid from that pool of <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ing.<br/>
<br/>
The Consumer <small>(in blue)</small> begins to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing for those <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s in his <small>(late)</small> quest to buy <a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ects.<br/>
<br/>
Over time, if the business is successful, the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s receive all they had initially put forward and then begin receiving the special value called <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>.<br/>
<br/>
The Consumer never gains any <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in his <a href="own.htm">own</a> Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es under this arrangement.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
In the attached <a href="pic.htm">pic</a>ture "Patched-Capitalism.png" we see again see inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s in the upper-<a href="left.htm">left</a> corner <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ing <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion and receiving <a href="title.htm">Title</a> to those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es, but this time the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s are *also* Consumers of the future <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t. They are taking risk for the purpose of receiving at-<a href="cost.htm">cost</a> <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t under their full control.<br/>
<br/>
After each round of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion, the <a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ects are not sold <small>(except in cases of surplus)</small>, because they are already the <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty of those who will consume them.<br/>
<br/>
The heavy line indicates there is no transfer of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership, but shows the <a href="fund.htm">fund</a>ers are already the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers without any need to purchase since they paid all the <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>s of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion and are the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers as a side-effect of their <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
The bottom of the <a href="pic.htm">pic</a>ture shows a Consumer with insufficient <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership buying <a href="obj.htm">Obj</a>ects late and probably <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">Cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
But in this case, that overpayment is treated as an investment from the Consumer who paid it - causing him to unwittingly <a href="fund.htm">Fund</a> the purchase and care of even *more* Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es that will eventually begin <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ing and therefore provide him with that which he needs.<br/>
<br/>
This allows the organization to grow and yet remain distributed as all <a href="new.htm">new</a> <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership is 'reflected' <a href="back.htm">back</a> to those willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for that growth.<br/>
<br/>
In systems theory this is <a href="know.htm">know</a>n as a negative-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop.<br/>
<br/>
----<br/>
<br/>
I'll clean this up over the weekend and put it on the wiki.<br/>
<br/>
Sincerely,<br/>
Patrick Anderson<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com">http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-07-2011:</span> <small>[Com<a href="moni.htm">moni</a>ng]</small> On 'Open Access'<br/>
James Quilligan wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> find a more <a href="use.htm">use</a>ful, resonant and transpa<a href="rent.htm">rent</a></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> terminology than 'open access commons'.</span><br/>
<br/>
Heeding the advice of the FSF, maybe '<a href="free.htm">Free</a> Access Commons', though I<br/>
would say that is also confusing since we would want '<a href="free.htm">Free</a>' to<br/>
indicate '<a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom' which, of course, is not without a <a href="pric.htm">Pric</a>e...<br/>
<br/>
other <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>as:<br/>
'<a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom Commons'<br/>
'Common <a href="free.htm">Free</a>doms'<br/>
<br/>
'<a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom Access'<br/>
'Access <a href="free.htm">Free</a>dom'<br/>
<br/>
'Common Access'<br/>
<br/>
<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/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-06-2011:</span> <small>[Com<a href="moni.htm">moni</a>ng]</small> <a href="free.htm">free</a> software commons<br/>
Roberto Verzola wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> the copyright system itself should eventually be abolished, because</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> it is *not in harmony with the nature of information goods*.</span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, the '<a href="virt.htm">virt</a>ual' <a href="part.htm">part</a> of all things, including genetics, industrial<br/>
design and <a href="compu.htm">compu</a>ter code should not be made <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificially scarce - it<br/>
should only be naturally restricted by the physical <a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es required<br/>
to host each instance.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot">> do not give anyone exclusive rights over creations, ie, the "right" to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> exclude others from enjoying the benefits of a non-rivalrous good)</small>.</span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, this will allow us to copy <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ects without <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial<br/>
restrictions except for any <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial restrictions <small>(including<br/>
excessive <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e)</small> enforced by the <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of the Physical<br/>
<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es required to create each copy.<br/>
<br/>
But copying is only one of the <a href="free.htm">free</a>doms we must <a href="protect.htm">protect</a>.<br/>
<br/>
The ability to study and change a finished <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ect <small>(or some future<br/>
instance of that <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ect)</small> requires the <a href="user.htm">User</a> has access to the <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es -<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span>even* when he lacks the <a href="skill.htm">skill</a>s required to operate those <a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es.<br/>
<br/>
So, Copyright is <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently <a href="use.htm">use</a>d mostly as a Copywrong - stopping our<br/>
otherwise inalienable Right to Copy organisms, <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines and programs.<br/>
<br/>
But if Copyright were completely eliminated, how we will <a href="protect.htm">protect</a> <a href="user.htm">User</a>s<br/>
who accept finished <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ects but are not given access to the <a href="virt.htm">Virt</a>ual<br/>
<a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of those goods?<br/>
<br/>
Similarly, if <a href="proper.htm">Proper</a>ty Rights were completely eliminated, we wouldn't<br/>
be able to write a contract with which we could <a href="insur.htm">insur</a>e <a href="user.htm">User</a>s gain<br/>
access to the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of the goods receive whenever they <a href="pay.htm">pay</a><br/>
<a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> by treating that overpayment as an investment from<br/>
the <a href="user.htm">User</a> who paid it...<br/>
<br/>
<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/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-04-2011:</span> <small>[fcf_discussion]</small> is <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty relevant for <a href="free.htm">free</a> software, do <a href="free.htm">free</a> cultures advocates ignore '<a href="real.htm">real</a> commons'<br/>
Michel Bauwens wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="free.htm">free</a> software as code needs a material infrastructure,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> to be <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>ed, distributed, etc. ..</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> is there a non-<a href="virt.htm">virt</a>ual <a href="part.htm">part</a> of <a href="free.htm">free</a> software,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> and if so, which one would that be?</span><br/>
<br/>
The "non-<a href="virt.htm">virt</a>ual <a href="part.htm">part</a>" IS the "material infrastructure".<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
For software <small>(whether <a href="free.htm">Free</a> or not)</small>, it includes:<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> The <a href="key.htm">key</a>board <a href="use.htm">use</a>d to enter the text.<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> The wires from the <a href="key.htm">key</a>board to the <a href="compu.htm">compu</a>ter.<br/>
<br/>
3.)</small> The separate components of the <a href="compu.htm">compu</a>ter, such as the CPU, RAM,<br/>
<a href="disk.htm">Disk</a>, Motherboard, etc.<br/>
<br/>
4.)</small> The physical <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> or media such as CD, DVD, <a href="usb.htm">USB</a><a href="key.htm">key</a>, etc. <a href="use.htm">use</a>d<br/>
to transport that software.<br/>
<br/>
5.)</small> All the <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines needed to mine the minerals <a href="use.htm">use</a>d to create all of<br/>
those components.<br/>
<br/>
6.)</small> All the <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines needed to extract the petroleum <a href="use.htm">use</a>d for the plastic <a href="part.htm">part</a>s.<br/>
<br/>
7.)</small> All the infrastructure such as roads, telecommunications, energy,<br/>
etc. <a href="use.htm">use</a>d to transport those <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines and the material they collect<br/>
and transform.<br/>
<br/>
8.)</small> All the factories and <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines needed to create the <a href="mac.htm">mac</a>hines<br/>
mentioned in #5, #6 and #7.<br/>
<br/>
9.)</small> All the agriculture required to feed the humans involved in all of<br/>
these steps, and recursively <a href="use.htm">use</a>d to feed the plants and animals these<br/>
humans <a href="use.htm">use</a> and eat.<br/>
<br/>
10.)</small> All the <a href="land.htm">Land</a>, Water and Shelter required to host that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion<br/>
and also to host the humans and their supporting organisms.<br/>
<br/>
11.)</small> All the negative impacts such as pollutions of all types and also<br/>
the fact that those finite re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es are being withheld from being<br/>
<a href="use.htm">use</a>d in other ways.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
This is only roughly complete, and is not a truly exhaustive list of<br/>
the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es required for the creation, <a href="stor.htm">stor</a>age, transport,<br/>
<a href="install.htm">install</a>ation, expression, maintenance and improvements needed for ALL<br/>
types of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, no matter whether the <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ective is Bread or<br/>
Software; Wine or Song.<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/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-03-2011:</span> <small>[fcf_discussion]</small> is <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty relevant for <a href="free.htm">free</a> software, do <a href="free.htm">free</a> cultures advocates ignore '<a href="real.htm">real</a> commons'<br/>
Hello all,<br/>
<br/>
This thesis and discussion are confused or ignore the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erence<br/>
between the 2 <a href="part.htm">part</a>s of every thing:<br/>
<br/>
1.)</small> The '<a href="virt.htm">Virt</a>ual' <a href="part.htm">part</a> of things such as <small>{Software, Genetics and<br/>
Industrial Design}</small> which are infinite in *potential*, but are<br/>
constrained by #2.<br/>
<br/>
2.)</small> The 'Physical' <a href="part.htm">part</a> of things needed to *host* and *express* the<br/>
<a href="virt.htm">Virt</a>ual <a href="part.htm">part</a>s - such as a <small>{<a href="compu.htm">Compu</a>ter, a Chicken and a Car}</small> - and,<br/>
recursively, all the Physical things, including <a href="land.htm">Land</a> throughout that<br/>
entire chain <small>(actually tree)</small> of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion required for those<br/>
instances to exist and be <a href="use.htm">use</a>d.<br/>
<br/>
So when considering whether society should treat some thing as<br/>
<a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty, please always qualify to which portion of that thing you<br/>
refer.<br/>
<br/>
Do not say:<br/>
<br/>
"The FSF does not see the concept of <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty as relevant for <a href="free.htm">Free</a><br/>
Software."<br/>
<br/>
Instead say:<br/>
<br/>
"The FSF does not see the concept of <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty as relevant for the<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span>*<a href="virt.htm">Virt</a>ual Portion of** <a href="free.htm">Free</a> Software."<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/>
<hr/><span class="date">Jan-03-2011:</span> The Next <a href="net.htm">Net</a><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 the physical layer *and* we also <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/>
This proves we could afford to buy or <a href="buil.htm">buil</a>d our <a href="own.htm">own</a> <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a> if we could learn to cooperate - since we already <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> all those bills and more!<br/>
<br/>
So those who are willing and able to prepay can be <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers and receive at-<a href="cost.htm">cost</a> access under our collective control.<br/>
<br/>
That solves the '<a href="stat.htm">stat</a>ic' case.<br/>
<br/>
The 'dynamic' case is the <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>icult <a href="part.htm">part</a>, but I think I have discovered a solution.<br/>
<br/>
So, to allow us to grow without suffering the usual problems of over accumulation and concentration of power, let's try the following:<br/>
<br/>
Let's allow all all late-comers who have not yet paid enough to purchase access from us as they already do from the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent corporations - and even <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> when the "market will bear", *but* under the strict condition that we treat that <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> as an investment from the <a href="user.htm">user</a> who paid it - so they too can gain the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership needed to <a href="protect.htm">protect</a> themselves from the collective we.<br/>
<br/>
Handling <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> as <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>er investment creates a negative-feed<a href="back.htm">back</a> loop that auto-distributes control into the hands of those willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> for it.<br/>
</p>
<p class='footer'>
Page generated from <a href=".text/diary-jan-2011">diary-jan-2011</a> by <a href=".code/etym.el">etym</a>.</p>
</body>
</html>