[ExI] Fwd: [Open Manufacturing] Launch of Abundance: The Journal of Post-Scarcity Studies, preliminary plans

[Bryan Bishop]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joseph Jackson <joseph.jackson at gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Subject: [Open Manufacturing] Launch  of Abundance:  The Journal of
Post-Scarcity Studies,   preliminary plans
To: Open Manufacturing <openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com>

http://groups.google.com/group/post-scarcity-agalmics-journal-launch

Dear all, you are receiving this because of the important thinking and
writing you are already doing on the critical challenge of our time,
the transition from scarcity based economics to a new Abundance
paradigm.

 As the pace of technological change continues to accelerate and old
institutions crumble seemingly over night, I think we all share the
conviction that a radically better world is not only possible, but
necessary (although it is hardly inevitable).

 The idea of "post-scarcity," "resource-based," or "thermoeconomics,"
has been around since at least the 1960s (with some references in the
1920s).  Additionally, heterodox economics such as the views of Henry
George, GK Chesterton, or the anarchist/mutualist/decentralist
tradition ( Proudhon, Kropotkin, Benjamin Tucker, Schumacher, Illich)
has an even longer history and is very relevant to the challenges
facing us in the early 21st century.  The most significant development
of recent times has been the rise of Free and Open Source Software,
followed by infant attempts to extend this model into other realms
beyond IT.  Michel Bauwens, the most prolific observer of these
trends, has dubbed the phenomenon P2P, and argues convincingly that
P2P organization constitutes the next phase of human evolution.

 My friends, it is time to establish Abundance as a field of study.  I
had been thinking along these lines for quite some time before the
2008 collapse and as it has unfolded, I've monitored a surge of
activity on the web, including this call to action by Roberto
Verzola:  http://rverzola.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/studying-abundance-1.pdf



 Our task is dauntingly difficult, as most of humanity has slumbered
in a scarcity stupor for so long they cannot be easily awakened.  The
goal is ambitious:  From 2009-2010 to lay out the central concepts and
theoretical foundations of Abundance Studies.


Establishing a journal is a way to focus our intellectual efforts,
build a "brand" and create a home for this new field.  So many of you
are already writing on this topic, wouldn't it be nice to have to have
an outlet for your "finished" product?  To explain, this will not be a
typical journal, which imposes artificial scarcity through editorial
decisions.  If you want to be published—you will get published
(eventually).


The journal is intended to function in conjunction with a community
site/portal/carnival blog/clearinghouse for Post Scarcity Theory.

 There will be  3 components; a wiki founded by Charles Collis in 2005
and which he has graciously volunteered.  2) the Community Site
(details to be decided)  3) The actual journal.


During the first year, the main site is intended to host discussion
around the specific topics covered in the forthcoming issue of the
journal.  We will announce the topic along with a deadline for
submission.  As a participant, you will hone your ideas with your
peers and when you feel you have a complete article (8-30 pages);
submit it before the deadline and look forward to it being published
in the issue.  If you don't finish in time (maybe you procrastinate
like me)—it is no big deal.  The journal functions mainly as a pacing
device.  You can always submit later for another issue (storage space
is basically infinite)!



The idea is that we create an "event" for ourselves; boosting
motivation by giving ourselves something to look forward to.  It also
keeps us moving toward the goal of laying out at least a first draft
overview of the Post-Scarcity field during this first year.

 There will be less structure imposed after the year is up, and
ideally, the journal and site will acquire momentum and issues can
proceed on perhaps a quarterly basis.


For those who are interested, I think a next step might be a Post
Scarcity Text Book, building on the content generated in the Journal's
first year.  Another offshoot might be an intensive RoadMap to Post
Scarcity.  Various Roadmaps (for Nanotech, Open Manufacturing) have
already been done, so this might serve as a meta-map.  Other projects
are bound to be generated.  For example, I've been thinking about a
board game based on Anti-Monopoly (look up this fantastic story) to
teach the concepts of the Commons, Peer Production, and Abundance.
http://freedomofscience.org/?page_id=21


Marc Fawzi, who is working on an energy-backed currency model, also
wants to make a game to simulate his concept.  I've contacted some
folks with game design experience in this email and hopefully we will
attract more.



To clarify:  there are lots of groups already working peripherally on
Post Scarcity.  The topic is kicking around the P2P Ning group, the
DIY biology google group and the Open Manufacturing google group.


I am not trying to poach everyone from these groups (though there will
be overlap).  Nor is the site/journal intended to duplicate the work
that is already being done.  I am trying to focus "meta-level"
discussion to construct the theoretical framework within which these
more applied and (often highly technical) efforts will proceed.


Although I am inviting you all to a google group, it is temporary and
only for discussion of the launch of the main site.  I'm already on
too many mailing lists and we need a site where everything is publicly
visible so you don't have to join or for that matter go searching
through tons of threads.  Email updates from a list soon become
annoying also.  Many details are to be decided about what will work
best.


During the first year, your core, founding team is


Bryan Bishop, coder at large, builder/maintainer of community portal

Charles Collis (wiki)

Joseph Jackson (lead coordinator of journal topics/troubleshooting)

Edward Miller, helping Bryan with miscellaneous maintenance of
community site, etc



You are all expected to self-select and participate as much or as
little as you like.  I hope that a sufficient number of you will
register with the main site as contributing bloggers and post or even
just cross post on a semi-regular basis.  I already have in mind
article contributions from a number of you for particular issues of
the journal.


Usually, I'm all for Democracy, but we can't debate everything.  So,
as a dictatorial decision, I considered Agalmics:  the Journal of Post-
Scarcity Economics, but the Agalmics term is a bit tricky for the
tongue.  Thus, the title is

 Abundance:  The Journal of Post-Scarcity Studies


The domain name for the main site is abundanceorannihilation.org  I
think this encapsulates the options nicely and besides I'm already
working a book by that title so if for some reason you all object,
I'll use it anyway.     Post-Scarcity.org redirects to Charle's Wiki.
http://www.adciv.org/Main_Page



Here is a list of initial interested parties I have identified.
Undoubtedly, I've left out many so pass this on to anyone else you
know of.  I've spoken to most of you about this project but I've
indicated where I lack contact info.

 Shay David, founder  Kaltura


Roberto Verzola
http://rverzola.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/studying-abundance-1.pdf


 Matt Pearson  zenbullets.com


Matt Arnold, organizer, Penguicon,



Michel Bauwens P2P foundation



Bryan Burns



Michael H. Goldhaber       Attention Economy


Douglas Rushkoff


 Paul Hartzog  contact via P2P foundation



James Hughes



Eric Hunting  contact via Michel Bauwens



Paul Fernhout



Michael Silverton     http://michael.silverton.palo-alto.ca.us/packets/?paged=2



RU Sirius  contact needed



 Bruce Sterling



Vernor Vinge        Not sure of current contact, use FOO camp
Christopher J. Fearnley   Buckminster Fuller FAQ

Charles Eisenstein Ascent of Humanity, Reality Sandwich.



Chris Anderson



Melanie Swan



Kevin Kelley



James Albus  People's Capitalism



Wade Frazier   no contact but maintains the interesting site
http://www.ahealedplanet.net/abund.htm



Marc Fawzi


Phil Bowermaster  the Speculist



Marshall Brain



Kevin Carson  Mutualist.org


Neil Gershenfeld


 Robert Grudin



Pat Kane  Play Ethic



Steve Burgess, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology



Bob Black, Abolition of Work, no contact details



Paul Pilzer, no direct contact info, interesting perspective although
not sure if he is a good fit.



Christopher Travis  cktravis at sentientarchitecture....



Umair Haque  Unsure of updated email contact



Eric Hunting     Contact via Michel



Corey Doctorow



Charles Stross



Neal Stephenson  don't have direct contact, using FOO camp mailing
list



Iain M Banks      no direct contact



Nathan Cravens



Jonathan Walther,  Reactor-Core.org




Rodney Shakespeare  BinaryEconomics.net     no direct contact

Robert Ashford



Peter Barnes Capitalism 3.0  contact needed



Adam Ardverson Ethical Economy contact via Michel Bauwens



Mike Masnik     Tech Dirt
http://techliberation.com/2007/01/19/masnick-on-post-scarcity-economics/
contact needed



Fleming Funch contact needed



http://www.newciv.org/



Bart klein Ikink  NaturalMoney.org    contact needed



 Steve Omohundra



Alvin Toffler  contact via Kurzweil about contribution to special
issue.



Hans Moravec



Patrick Anderson



Chris Cook    contact needed, use P2P foundation/group



Ron Long



Below is a speculative list of topics.  Also some rambling half baked
thoughts



Abundance  Vol I, Issue 1



Historical overview of post scarcity thought and notable initiatives.
Thoughts on why the early 21st century offers a realistic shot because
of cheap, networked technology.  Personal stories and testimonial from
our contributors on how they became interested in Post Scarcity.



Vol I  Issue 2

The Theory of Value



Economics has no coherent Theory of Value and we must solve this
problem if we are to establish the field of Abundance.  The Labor
Theory of Value has advantages in that it is objective and normative—
it states that price should tend toward the cost of production; it
also allows us to determine what constitutes equitable exchange.
Unfortunately, the LTV does not acknowledge that the amount of labor
embodied in products is constantly diminishing with the advance of
automation and improvements in capital.  Marginal Utility Theory was
held to be the replacement for the Labor Theory of Value but this type
of utilitarianism is ultimately subjective and can't provide a sane
basis for economics.  In this approach, all that matters is satisfying
an agent's subjective preference.  But people might prefer anything at
all ( in the case of preference adaptation a person who is used to
being abused or deprived—starving—actually adjusts to this
condition).  Preference satisfaction alone can't serve as the basis
for well-being—an agent can easily prefer things that are objectively
bad for him. See Amartya Sen-the Capabilities approach to measure
agent's welfare in terms of the intrinsically valuable doings/beings
he has the capability to achieve.



Binary Economics (Kelso/Adler) put forth after the great depression,
advocated a new concept of "productiveness" in which Capital was
conceptualized as autonomously doing work.



I propose a theory tentatively dubbed the Automation/Technological
Theory of Value.  All economic value starts with a Gift, the sun, thus
there really is such a thing as a free lunch, provided we
intelligently use technology to satisfy needs.  Man simply uses his
mind to harness energy to do work.  Rather than a labor theory of
value, a "play" theory is more appropriate, as all advances in
standard of living come from using technology to always do more with
less.



Vol I  Issue 3



Property



Since the theory of value is such a mess, it is no wonder the notion
of property is confused as well.  Proudhon famously declared that
property is theft, distinguishing the concept of possession (occupancy
and use of land/means of production but no absentee ownership).
Following this line, I think the phrase Property is Use gets at the
core idea behind property rights—these rights to use a resource come
with a responsibility to act as a steward and to use the resource in
actual production.  Seen in this light, the idea of Intellectual
Property (a term that collapses distinct legal regimes of copyright,
trademark, and patent, and should never have been adopted) is revealed
to be rubbish.  So called, "IP" is not property at all, but merely a
negative right to exclude.  At least with copyright, the author
nominally owns his own words/expression, but even here artists have
been sued for copying themselves!!  See the case of John Fogerty—being
sued by his record company for being too similar to himself in the
song Run Through the Jungle! Even more harmful than copyright, today's
patent system is a total failure as a property system—it benefits
neither the public, nor inventors—serving only lawyers and
corporations who can amass the largest portfolio.  A patent is not a
right to do anything—2 parties may find themselves at a standoff with
neither able to practice an invention because of overlapping blocking
claims.  Boundaries are impossible to determine, leading to endless,
costly litigation.  Worst of all, independent invention is no defense,
so I might happen upon my own solution to a problem only to be blocked
by an existing patent owner or a troll who never had any intention of
practicing the invention.  Even if my approach is different, the
doctrine of equivalents still allows the existing patent to block me.



A unified theory of property for both physical and intellectual
resources is possible if we return to the central idea of use.



Patrick Anderson's User-Owner Theory  is ideal for this issue.  Also
see Chris Cook's Open Capitalist Project, which promotes the idea of
trusts (see Islamic finance) as a solution to a debt-based system of
mortgage-slavery.



The Commons is also a critical idea.  Space as Commons is a theme
worth exploring, perhaps in its own issue.  Space is the ultimate
Commons, and following the frontier gold rush model by staking claims
on the moon, etc, might not be in humanity's best interests, no matter
how rich it makes the lucky first mover entrepreneurs.  Today, the
baby field of private space entrepreneurship is an exclusive
billionaire's club.  Leading advocates espouse a sort of hyper-
capitalist rhetoric that seems grossly out of touch with the most
recent events.  Our property system on earth can hardly be said to
have been a success; transposing it to the heavens will surely have a
hellish result.  It might be time to rethink that Asteroid Mining
business plan you just submitted at the last invite only Space Cadet
Summit.



Vol II  Issue 1



Money



Money is a tool, a technology, nothing less, nothing more.  Today, it
is a very poorly designed and implemented technology.  The Social
Currency or "Open Source Currency" movement is slowly gathering steam
as groups worldwide implement LETS and other local or complementary
currency systems.  This topic is enormous so the issue will feature
summaries of the history of money as it has been implemented and an
introduction to notable emerging alternatives.





Vol II  Issue 2



Attention/Reputation



The field of Attention and Reputation Economics is likely to become
its own sub-discipline within Post Scarcity.  This issue will consider
the key difference between attention/reputation and other forms of
currency.  Is attention truly scarce?   Today's crude reputation
metrics and attention filters (Digg, Amazon, Ebay) are primitive and
there are many very technical aspects to consider.  We urgently need
to get started if we are to have any hope of coping with the
information overload that will accompany LifeLogging and ubiquitous
embedded computing.  LifeLogging is potentially the most socially
disruptive technology imaginable, and unlike Drexlerian Nanotech—all
the enabling technologies are already here.  Once lifelogging begins,
I anticipate a hard takeoff to a "Sociological Singularity" within a
decade as "omniveillance" is the only stable endpoint.  A Bill of
LifeLogger User Rights and a new Social Compact are required if we are
to use lifelogging's potential to enhance sociability rather than
degenerate further into a "reality TV" based society.  See Doctorow's,
Whuffie, DotMK.







Vol II Issue 3





Robotics/Basic Income



Revisiting the theme of Automation from our issue on the theory of
value, this issue anticipates the robotics revolution.  James Albus'
People's Capitalism,  Marshall Brain's various scenarios, Moravec—
let's check in on these ideas that have been floating around for
several decades and see where we stand.  The Basic Income may fit here
also.



Vol III Issue 1





Nanotechnology/FAB manufacturing/Open Manufacturing/Energy



Lot of overlapping themes here and we can splice these into separate
issues.



The overall theme here is the transition to radically decentralized
production.  See Carson's new book, Mutualist Theory of Organization.



Rather than technical considerations (though obviously the tech
details matter) the focus is on the structural aspects—how to avoid a
Microsoft of Molecular Manufacturing, discussion of relevant fiction,
eg, The Diamond Age.





Vol III Issue 2



Ethics and Economics of AI



If we don't implement Post Scarcity Values before the birth of GAI, we
may be in big trouble.



Vol III  Issue 3



Economics of Virtual Worlds



Science Fiction:  we might do a "best of" issue summarizing post
scarcity fiction.  Obviously, Sci Fi is a vast source of post-scarcity
speculation and any of the above issues could feature one or more "lit
reviews" of sci fi relevant to the topic of that issue.


VR is obviously poised to become an ever greater part of the economy.
Are we doomed to repeat past mistakes in this new setting or can we
avoid imposing artificial scarcity?  Discussion of contemporary
examples, business models, and property regimes.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Open Manufacturing" group.
To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---