Message passing for objects

Mark Janssen dreamingforward at gmail.com
Mon Mar 18 05:40:12 CET 2013


Just the thing I'm talking about.  So I'm not the only one trying out
these ideas..... :)

(via the p2p-foundation mailing list)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals at yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: A Distributed Economy -- A blog involving Linked Data
To: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh at gmail.com>, Michel Bauwens
<michel at p2pfoundation.net>
Cc: Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>, "public-lod at w3.org"
<public-lod at w3.org>, Paul Cockshott <william.cockshott at glasgow.ac.uk>


Dear Brent,

Thanks for bringing up this issue again, and let me rephrase.

When considering resilience there are three networked systems to
consider: humans, things and ideas/data/information.

All three somehow now mesh and interact through the Internet and the
Internet of Things.

The conceptual model for the Semantic Web incorporates all three.

Now if we want to complete this model we must incorporate the (Global)
Ecosystems of Planet Earth.

Thus we are able to create economic models that incorporate security,
resilience, reliability and sustainability.

As we speak thousands and thousands of engineers and scientists are
already tackling the fundamental task of coming up with new
all-encompassing paradigms and the 7th IEEE International Conference
on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies will deal with quite a few of
these issues.

I will soon be setting up a blog which will deal with resilience, more
specifically resilient grids and resilient grid technologies.

The theme of resilience whether it relates to cyber space, natural
ecosystems and resources management as part of sustainable economic
development, human society or economic assets vis a vis natural
disasters or conflict is proving to be be one of the hottest new
themes in funded research, and one main central theme in Horizon 2020,
the new European Union 71 billion euro research fund.



Milton Ponson
GSM: +297 747 8280
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for
sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT
tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and
repositories of data and information for sustainable development

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager. This message contains confidential information and
is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

________________________________
From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh at gmail.com>
To: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
Cc: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals at yahoo.com>; Samuel
Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>; "public-lod at w3.org" <public-lod at w3.org>;
Paul Cockshott <william.cockshott at glasgow.ac.uk>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 7:12 PM

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

In an attempt to understand the conversation we had, I was sent in a
flurry of confusion. I started checking out books, and one was
Resilience by Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy. I found a few quotes
that seem exciting to me:

"Adhocracies thrive on data. And by the stroke of fantastic luck,
we're currently witnessing the global birth of an adhocracy of data --
a global revolution that, for the first time, empowers orgranizations
with the capacity to collect and correlate widely distributed
real-time information about the way many critical systems are
performing. This kind of open data will play a central role in
resilience strategies for years to come." pg. 266, Resilience, Andrew
Zolli and Ann Marie Healy

"And for organizations of all types there is a powerful lesson here:
Resilience benefits accrue to organizations that prioritize the
collection, presentation, and sharing of data." pg. 269, Resilience,
Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy

"A related theme in the resilience discussion is the importance of
networks, which provide a universal, abstract reference system for
describing how information, resources, and behaviours flow
GSM: +297 747 8280
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for
sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT
tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and
repositories of data and information for sustainable development

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager. This message contains confidential information and
is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

________________________________
From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh at gmail.com>
To: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
Cc: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals at yahoo.com>; Samuel
Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>; "public-lod at w3.org" <public-lod at w3.org>;
Paul Cockshott <william.cockshott at glasgow.ac.uk>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 7:12 PM

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

In an attempt to understand the conversation we had, I was sent in a
flurry of confusion. I started checking out books, and one was
Resilience by Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy. I found a few quotes
that seem exciting to me:

"Adhocracies thrive on data. And by the stroke of fantastic luck,
we're currently witnessing the global birth of an adhocracy of data --
a global revolution that, for the first time, empowers orgranizations
with the capacity to collect and correlate widely distributed
real-time information about the way many critical systems are
performing. This kind of open data will play a central role in
resilience strategies for years to come." pg. 266, Resilience, Andrew
Zolli and Ann Marie Healy

"And for organizations of all types there is a powerful lesson here:
Resilience benefits accrue to organizations that prioritize the
collection, presentation, and sharing of data." pg. 269, Resilience,
Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy

"A related theme in the resilience discussion is the importance of
networks, which provide a universal, abstract reference system for
describing how information, resources, and behaviours flow through
many complex systems. Having a common means to describe biological,
economic, and ecological systems, for example, allows researchers to
make comparisons between the ways these very different kinds of
entities approach similar problems, such as stopping a contagion -
whether an actual virus, a financial panic, an unwanted behavior, or
an environmental contaminant - when it begins to spread. Having a
shared frame of reference allows us to consider how successful tactics
in one domain might be applied to another - as we'll see in newly
emerging fields like ecological finance." pg 19, Resilience, Andrew
Zolli and Ann Marie Healy

"Rather the resilience frame suggests a different, complementary
effort to mitigation: to redesign our institutions, embolden our
communities, encourage innovation and experimentation, and support our
people in ways that will help them be prepared and cope with surprises
and distruptions, even as we work to fend them off." pg 23,
Resilience, Andrew Zolli and Ann Marie Healy

It is interesting that Buckminster Fuller wrote about similar ideas
over 30 years ago:

"The inefficiency of automobiles' reciprocating engines - and their
traffic-system-wasted fuel - and the energy inefficiency of today's
buildings, are only two of hundreds of thousands of instances that can
be cited of the design-avoidable energy wastage. But the technical
raison d'etre for either the energy-effectiveness gains or losses is
all completely invisible to human eyes. Thus, the significance of
their omni-integratable potentialities is uncomprehended by either the
world's leaders or the led.
Neither the great political and financial power structures of the
world, nor the specialization-blinded professionals, nor the
population in general realize the sum-totally the
omni-engineering-integratable, invisible revolution in metallurgical,
chemical, and electronic arts now makes it possible to do so much more
with ever fewer pounds and volumes of material, ergs of energy, and
seconds of time per given technological function that it is now highly
feasible to take care of everybody on Earth at a "higher standard of
living than any have ever known.", pg. xxv, Critical Path, R.
Buckminster Fuller

"World Game will become increasingly effective in its prognoses and
programming when the world-around, satellite-interrelayed computer
system and its omni-Universe-operative (time-energy) accounting system
are established. This system will identify the kilowatt-hour-expressed
world inventory of foods, raw and recirculating resources, and all the
world's unique mechanical and structural capabilities and their
operating capacities as well  as the respective kilowatt-hours of
available energy-income-derived operating power with which to put
their facilities to work. All the foregoing information will become
available in respect to all the world-around technology's
environment-controlling, life-sustaining, travel- and
communication-accomidating structures and machines.", pg. 219,
Critical Path, R. Buckminster Fuller

I'm happy that Milton Ponson pointed out Resilience. I had never
thought about resilience before. Looking into it was very gratifying.
It gave me some confidence that I was perhaps doing some things right,
but at the same time startled me by how much there is to learn to
somehow survive the free fall. Doing a search for Linked Data and
Resilience gave me a result from rkbexpolorer
(http://www.rkbexplorer.com/explorer/#display=project-{http%3A//wiki.rkbexplorer.com/id/resist})
which is from the ReSIST (Resilience for Survivability) project in
Europe (http://www.resist-noe.org/). They also have some links to some
free course material at <http://resist.isti.cnr.it/home.php>.

I believe my blog evolved to explore a peer-to-peer economy. Michael
Bauwens desribes such economies as distributed networks, "As
political, economic, and social systems transform themselves into
distributed networks, a new human dynamic is emerging: peer to peer
(P2P). As P2P gives rise to the emergence of a third mode of
production, a third mode of governence, and a third mode of property,
it is poised to overhaul our political economy in unprecendented
ways." (www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499)

This suggests something broader. As a result of our conversation, I
also looked at some people with socialist views such as Roberto
Verzola, W. Paul Cockshott and Allin Cottrell, Raoul Viktor, and Heinz
Dieterich.

Roberto Verzola describes an economy of abundance, which may indeed be
linked to P2P technologies.

"An economy of abundance seeks to dismantle or reform these
scarcity-generating institutions in such a way as to affirm our
freedom to live life as art (self-expression to others), social equity
(so that everything can live life as art), and sustainability (so that
all life can thrive into the future). Among other things, this implies
a much greater role for various forms of shared property, individual
an community-level self-reliance, and participatory decision making."
(http://www.shareable.net/blog/event-the-economics-of-abundance)

He also argues that for innovation to proceed, everyone seeking
knowledge should have access to it.

"the most important means to ensure that innovation can proceed is to
ensure that everyone seeking knowledge has access to it. ... Knowledge
that helps empower people depends on openness, while knowledge that is
used to coerce, to exert power over the disempowered, thrives on
secrecy" p. 150, The Economics of Abunance: A Political Economy of
Freedom, Equity and Sustainability, Roberto Verzola

This seems to align well with my present feelings.

I feel that engineering is so saturated with IP, that it is hard to
feel like you're not going to be doing that. At the same time I want
to develop my skills and thrive. How do become a Professional Engineer
and not feel like you're going to be doing that? What if you don't
like the lawyer saturated culture where people are suing other people
over some idea you or someone else produced? I can sense that a lot of
people, especially in the hacker and maker community, want to be able
to support themselves and work on cool new things but don't want to
deny other people to work on the same cool things. Why do ideas have
to take on a life of their own and become part of something you might
be employed by, but have no control beyond that? Sorry about the
extreme language, but why do I imagine it as making deal with the
devil? Betraying your friends so you can enjoy life and eat? In this,
there is an underlying assumption that there are institutions that do
not want to share or partner, or make it very difficult. If it is
easier, I feel that could be better.

Buckminster Fuller also wrote about such things:

"2. Grandmother taught us the Golden Rule: "Love thy neighbor as thy
self--do unto others as you would they should do unto you.

3. As we became older and more experienced, out uncles began to
caution us to get over our sensitivity. "Life is hard," they
explained. 'There is nowhere nearly enough life support for everybody
on our planet, let alone enough for a comfortable life support. If you
want to raise a family and have a comfortable life for them, you are
going to have to deprive many others of the opportunity to survive and
the sooner, the better. Your grandmother's Golden Rule is beautiful,
but it doesn't work.'" p. 123. Critical Path, R. Buckminster Fuller

Is it possible to have a win-win between people an business? Are there
any financial barriers to entry and/or partnership? Sometimes I fear
that I will never be paid enough to implement my ideas, or if I do
then it will be too late to enter the market. Either I can't afford to
do the work, or someone who developed and patented something that
matches at least some of my idea decides not to involve me. Thus I
would question spending the time developing my idea. I'm assuming I
can develop my idea for my own personal use (possibly not?). However,
I am more certain I may have trouble sharing and selling things
developed from my ideas. I imagine that this favors those who already
have money.

People like Eric von Hippel and Michael Bauwens both speak about a lot
of innovation goinf on outside the firm. For example Michel Bauwen's
states:

"The French-Italian school of 'cognitive capitalism' stresses the
value creation today is no longer confined to the enterprise, but
beholden to the mass intellectuality of
knowledge workers, who through their lifelong learning/experiencing
and systematic connectivity, constantly innovate within and without
the enterprise. This is an important
argument, since it would justify what we see as the only solution for
the expansion of the P2P sphere into a society at large: the universal
basic income. Only the
independence of work and the salary structure can guarantee the peer
producers can continue to create this sphere of highly productive use
value."
The Political Economy of Peer Production (www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499)

Eric von Hippel also speaks about his book.
(http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20060123-Eric.von.Hippel-Democratizing.Innovation.ogg)

However, giving people money for doing nothing makes me feel
uncomfortable. Of course, as Heinz Dietrich suggests, if you already
have money, things work just fine:
"The first step, in fact, would be to establish a new cybernetic
principle; you need something that coordinates billions of economic
transactions everyday. And, so far, the market has been a relatively
well-functioning system under two conditions: If the market is not
monopolistic and you have the buying power for the merchandise you
produce and for the services, then the market coordinates quite
well."-- The Socialism of the 21st Century
(http://eipcp.net/transversal/0805/dieterich/en)

Paul Cockshott, and Allin Cottrell suggest a payment system determined
democratically, "The payment system outlined in chapter 2 depends on
the
idea that the total labour content of each product or service can be
calculated." p. 8, Towards a New Socialism

If this is by the state, then I am moved to say I do not trust the
government to do much right at all. Certainly, this is what I feel if
I spend any length of time watching the news. But I would like to look
into it. If this develops into something, the state should be involved
at some level. I feel bad about this. I'll have to read more.
However, I agree that with more democracy things would be better.

"The principal bases for a post-Soviet socialism must be radical
democracy and efficient planning. The democratic element, it is now
clear, is not a luxury,
or something that can be postponed until conditions are especially
favourable. Without democracy, as we have argued above, the leaders of
a socialist society
will be driven to coercion in order to ensure the production of a
surplus product, and if coercion slackens the system will tend to
stagnate." p. 7, Towards a New Socialism

I definately think there needs to be some way to accomplish things
that makes it fair to people. In terms of me, I believe this underlies
a larger problem than me being connected with the right job or being
afraid of debt going back to school. It is the problem of connecting
people with the right jobs,
utilizing the skills they already have so they don't have to fear
paying to learn what they already know, and raising awareness that the
jobs are there. I dream about linked data being able to illuminate
relationships between present skills and related skills to job seekers
and employers. I also dream about linked data allowing people to
market themselves with clarity as a basket of skills that represents
who they really are rather than a basket of skills that was set by a
well-meaning college, trade-school, or university. I honestly believe
that people who do something they have a passion for, will be more
effective employees or entrepreneurs.

But how to pay for it? If you take out debt you need to find a way to
pay it off. If you can't find something that reflects your values you
may feel like you're enslaved to something else while trying to pay it
off. It can be a pressing struggle as Paul Grignon's Money as Debt
video on Youtube describes
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K5_JE_gOys). Paul Grigon and others
say that our present monetary system leads to infinite growth.

"We need to become politically sensitive to the invisible
architectures of power. In distributed systems, where there is no
overt hierarchy, power is a function of design. One such system,
perhaps the most important of all, is the monetary system, whose
interest-bearing design requires the market to be linked to a system
of infinite growth, and this link needs to be broken.
A global reform of the monetary system, or the spread of new means of
direct social production of money, are the necessary conditions for
such a break."
(http://p2pfoundation.net/About_The_Foundation)

I'd imagine this would create no problems for people as long as there
is the will and resources to grow infinitely. However, Paul Grigon
points out an exception: those with the money to lend at interest will
eventually wind up with all of the money, and due to forclosure the
property too.

My site explores distributed funding.
(http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com/2012/03/distributed-funding.html).
I am still not sure how exactly to accomplish it. I think it may
involve something like Ripple (https://classic.ripplepay.com/) and
PaySwarm (http://payswarm.com/). A friend of mine pointed out that it
did not seem that Ripple allows to keep track of what you owe who,
whereas PaySwarm appears to do so. I may need to develop something on
my own (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webpayments/2013Feb/0034.html)
that involes donations, and whatever models are needed. Embarrasingly,
I'm still learning JavaScript. Thankfully, my friends are also
encouraging me to focus on some small project.

A few other thoughts:

As I was reading, I noticed some mention of rival and non-rival goods.
Rival goods could be seen as raw materials or products, and non-rival
goods could exist in an infinite amount. In the
maker world I see things such as CAD files as non-rival and raw
materials and end products as rival. I question whether people would
still pay for rival goods, and perhaps donate for non-rival goods if
there was an open source economy? What if things such as PaySwarm made
it easy to do so?

The Rep Rap and Ardrino are open source hardware, and all products by
Makerbot used to be (http://josefprusa.cz/open-hardware-meaning/,
http://www.hoektronics.com/2012/09/21/makerbot-and-open-source-a-founder-perspective/).
People can share their designs, but would people share their profits
with those who contributed to their idea? It wouldn't have to be much,
as small amounts still add up. Would this be bad? Even if people don't
have to pay, things might still vary as does the amount you might get
by selling a book? Concieveably if you have a lot of open source
hardware, then you could have as much flexibility in the physical
world as you do in the software world. In an extreme case, maybe you
could have open source spaceships. They are after all lots of little
parts, much like a GNU/Linux distro.

If things could be freely copied and not exclusively owned as in the
GPL, would you still have brand loyalty? While not going into the fine
details, the Ultimaker and the Makerbot Thing-O-Matic look very
similar. Why would I want one over the other? If whatever you chose
was linked to previous innovations, and people let their donations
flow to those authors, how much would it matter?

Would the crowd maintain accountability so people would not collect
money for doing nothing? The maker community seems to be supportive of
things that they are free to contribute to. How far could this go,
especially with support from arguments made by Don Tapscott and
Anthony D. Williams in the book Wikinomics? For the legality, things
like the JOBs act seem exciting. However, this seems to be for
equity-based crowdfunding and not just donations
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JOBS_Act). I'd imagine that it would be
both even if some of the things were as described above. What if you
were retired, and you had money, but nothing you contributed was being
used? Could you grow your money to support yourself?

The potential of digital technologies seems huge. I read about the
Industrial Internet, as pointed out by Milton Poson. The GE report
titled, "Industrial Internet. Pushing the Boundaries of Minds and
Machines"<www.ge.com/docs/chapters/Industrial_Internet.pdf>, by Peter
C. Evans and Marco Annunziata has the following quote:

"The combination of physics- based approaches, deep sector specific
domain expertise, more automation of information flows, and predictive
capabilities can join with the existing
suite of “big data” tools. The result is the Industrial Internet
encompasses traditional approaches with newer hybrid approaches that
can leverage the power of both historic and
real-time data with industry specific advanced analytics."

Of course, this makes me want to go down the path of Density
Functional Theory and Molecular Dynamics. I had a brief exposure to
these concepts in graduate school, and it reminds me of the layout
algorithms in Gephi (at least MD, I know a little less about DFT).
Yes! I just learned about DBSCAN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBSCAN)
in R (http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~dq209/others/Rdatamining.pdf) and ELKI
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELKI). And here you have it, the
original DBSCAN paper
(http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.121.9220).

In addition, they speak about Enterprise Management Software in terms
of the Industrial Internet:

"At the other end of the spectrum, enterprise management software and
solutions have been widely adopted to drive organizational
efficiencies at the firm level. The benefits
of these efforts include better tracking and coordination of labor,
supply chain, quality, compliance, and sales and distribution across
broad geographies and product lines.
However, these efforts have sometimes fallen short because while they
can passively track asset operations at the product level, the ability
to impact asset performance is limited.
Optimizing the system to maximize asset and enterprise performance is
what the Industrial Internet offers."

This reminds me of a presentation given by Dr. Manoj Dharwadkar of
Bentley Systems Inc. titled, "Using Sematic Web Technologies in Open
Applications" (http://www.w3.org/2008/12/ogws-slides/Bentley.pdf). It
also reminds me of the The Simantics Platform at the VTT Technical
Research Centre of Finland (www.vtt.fi) and the mission of Dassault
Systems (www.3ds.com). They all have the ISO15926 ontology in common.

I wasn't sure if they were talking about linked data in the report:

"To make information intelligent, new connections need to be developed
so that Big Data ‘knows’ when and where it needs to go, and how to get
there. If imaging data is better
connected, the right doctor could automatically receive a patient’s
rendered images so the information is finding the doctor instead of
the doctor
finding the information. "  --- Opportunity for Liked Data?

random paper with medical devices communicating with the semantic web:
http://radiographics.rsna.org/content/30/7/2039.abstract

http://www.mdpnp.org/uploads/8-3_Schluter_26Jan.pdf (devices
commmunicating, like Industrial Internet)

Further, they go into what is needed to to build the Industrial Internet:

"The Industrial Internet will require an adequate backbone. Data
centers, broadband spectrum, and fiber networks are all components of
the ICT infrastructure
that will need to be further developed to connect the various
machines, systems, and networks across industries and geographies.
This will require a combination of inter- and intra- state
infrastructure order to support the significant growth in data flows
involved with the Industrial Internet.
"

I heard that Oklahoma, and the U.S. in general, needs more fiber.
Someone said that Denver, Dallas, Kansas City, Silicon Valley,
Austin(?), all have good networks.

How would the talent to build the Industrial Internet be gathered?
Here are a few more quotes:

"Other alternatives for sourcing cross-discipline talent might include
developing the existing resources in the native domain through
collaborative approaches. Instead
of building or buying talent that has multiple skills, create
environments that accelerate the ability of people with different
skills to interact and innovate together.
On a larger scale, approaches such as crowdsourcing might be able to
close some of the capabilities gaps that are sure to occur."

"Today, the people that manage big data systems or perform advanced
analytics have developed unique talents through self-driven
specialization, rather than through
any programs that build a standard set of skills or principles.
Co-development of curriculum, integration of academic staff into
industry, and other approaches will be
needed to ensure that the talent needs of the Industrial Internet do
not outpace the educational system."

There definately is a lag between the development of IT, and its
adoption. In Chemical Engineering, I'm pretty sure people thought I
was crazy when I started talking about the Semantic Web. People in
network security, and even computer science were not familiar with it.
If you're talking about Wikinomics (Openness, Peering, Sharing, Acting
Global) thinking there might be some growth to do. I heard of people
at universities and hackerspaces speak of themselves as universities,
but their culture is very different. Maybe hackerspaces are on the
extreme of being open, whereas universities are less so? Maybe this is
the case with IP. Maybe less so, with papers (but who can access
them?).
See a presentation in 2008 by RIC Jackson, then Director of the
FIATECH Consortium:
(http://www.slccc.net/documents_pdf/Technology-Ric%20Jackson%200811.pdf).
Adoption of new tech for the enterprise is slow:
(http://pandodaily.com/2012/02/11/why-oracle-may-really-be-doomed-this-time/).

There are some, such as the Mayor of Newark, NJ, who bothered to go to
SXSW to speak about the adoption of more tech:
(http://pandodaily.com/2013/03/10/cory-booker-calls-for-tech-empowered-open-democracy/).

Here are three more quotes from the report:

"Measures to ensure the security of restricted data, including
intellectual property,proprietary information, and personally
identifiable information (PII) are critical.
" --- this reminds me of the Read Write Web Community Group

"Currently there are several standards bodies, but they are
fragmented. The promotion and adoption of common and consistent
standards on data structure, encryption,
transfer mechanisms, and the proper use of data will go a long way in
advancing cyber security."

I was made fun of by a CS graduate when I was excited about a possible
new standard.

"Academia: Further research on data security and privacy should be
pursued, including research on enhancing IT security, metrology,
inferencing concerns with non-
sensitive data, and legal foundations for privacy in data aggregation."

Perhaps more collaboration with the hacker community? Is it true that
some programmers, and some in CS tend to build things and ignore
security in the process? I wonder what is going on at hacker
conferences like Blackhat and DEFCON. BTW, people at the Chaos
Communication Congress are geniuses.

Whew! That's enough. If you're interested in more, read the report.
It's exciting. :)

I asked myself this question: What is the future role of the University?

The university may serve as a repository for books, a place to do
research, and a meeting place. Lectures? I'm not sure.

How do the things that Michael Hammer & Lisa W. Hershman talk about fit in?

They wrote a book titled, "Faster, Cheaper, Better: The 9 Levers for
Transforming How Work Gets Done".
I believe they were talking about Business Process Improvement
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_improvement). Would
Process Owners, as mentioned by them, serve a major role in the
Industrial Internet?
(http://it.toolbox.com/wiki/index.php/Process_Owner)

----------------

Resources that I am considering reading:

The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, Evengy Morozov, 2011

To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological
Solutionism, Evengy Morozov, 2013

The Wealth of Networks, Yochai Benkler, Yale University Press, 2006

Science and the Crisis in Society, Frank H. George, Wiley, 1970

Future Perfect: The Case for Progress in a Networked Age, Steven Johnson, 2012

Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organization Without Organizations,
Clay Shirky, 2008

Nasa's Advanced Automation for Space Missions,
http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/ (Robots, Expert Systems, Etc..),
The Technical Stuff, 1980

The Future: Six Drivers of Global Change, Al Gore, 2013,
http://www.amazon.com/The-Future-Drivers-Global-Change/dp/0812992946,
Reviewed by Tim Berners-Lee, may relate well to the previous link

An Inquiry to Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,
Adam Smith, LL.D. F.R.S., MDCCCXLIII (1843) (according to Wikipedia,
it was first published in 1776)

Books by Chris Anderson and Lawrence Lessig

Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom,
Rebecca MacKinnon, 2012

Business Process Improvement: the breakthrough strategy for total
quality, productivity, and competitiveness, H J Harrington , 1991

Faster, better, cheaper : low-cost innovation in the U.S. space
program, Howard E McCurdy, 2001


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Michel Bauwens
<michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:

it seems to me that these shifts have already started, before 2013,
including in these fields, but are also much more long-term
transformations ... in the case of deep-pocketed and politically
powerful vested interests, only moderate bottom-up advances can be
expected in the very short term ...

both telecom and banking are still heavily centralized, they enabled
people-based p2p dynamics but control the infrastructure, the data,
the design and many other aspects of their only partly distributed
systems ...

I'm sure the same is true of GE .. no corporation will allow a fully
p2p distributed system without some form of centralized control

Michel


On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:54 AM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program
<metadataportals at yahoo.com> wrote:

2013 will see the advent of new paradigms for infrastructures that up
until now where centralized, i.e. electric power generation and
distribution, intermodal transportation and logistics, food and
agro-industrial production and distribution, industrial production and
distribution, consumer products manufacturing and distribution,
pharmaceuticals production and distribution, energy extraction and
distribution (including coal, gas, shale oil/gas and biofuels).

The data and telecom infrastructure and parallel the banking and
financial sectors are the only ones espousing decentralized
distributed P2P (and B2B) processes.

Resilience is a property that can only be achieved by copying the
structure of the internet and some of its inherent characteristics.

By defining strategic infrastructures as decentralized networks of
distributed P2P (B2B) processes embedded in an intelligent grid it
becomes possible to define resilience in a way similar to the
resilience of the Internet.

And a resilient grid lends itself perfectly to embedding in a semantic
web overlay grid.

The Industrial Internet as defined by GE and outlined in a recent
white paper comes pretty close to it but not quite yet.

See http://www.gereports.com/meeting-of-minds-and-machines/.

Milton Ponson
GSM: +297 747 8280
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for
sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT
tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and
repositories of data and information for sustainable development

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager. This message contains confidential information and
is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named
addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

________________________________
From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh at gmail.com>
To: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals at yahoo.com>
Cc: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>; Samuel Rose
<samuel.rose at gmail.com>; "public-lod at w3.org" <public-lod at w3.org>; Paul
Cockshott <william.cockshott at glasgow.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 2:10 AM

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

Oh well, I'll share my story on a W3C forum no less.

Model, true. Would my experiences even translate? I think you'd have
to see this from my own personal perspective. Even though I grew up in
an American home there was a lot of discourse in my family. There
wasn't a lot of room for personal expression, and my family was very
religious so I was afraid of offending God if I went against the
dominating figure and/or ideology in the family. I was also very shy
growing up, and I did not have much money, even though I came from an
upper middle class family. I felt out of place most of the time, and
sometimes I had ideas that people did not seem to understand or be
interested in. I liked computers, and wanted to learn more about them.
I was always asking people doing computer stuff how to program, even
though I had a lot of trouble doing it myself. I think it was because
I struggled with algebra (and other maths), but more so algebra. I
also was a bit lost in some documentation, and may have not been fully
aware of other resources that may have helped. I was afraid of
tinkering, but I built webpages and was proud of them and I also built
structures in the woods (but that is a bit off topic). My family paid
for my college. I'm thankful for that, but it also leaves me with a
feeling of responsibility to them. I'll admit to not being in sync
with things in my undergraduate years. It looks very good if you have
an internship. But at the time I made a few mistakes perhaps. I was a
bit afraid to try because the companies I qualified for either were
not doing something that interested me and/or something that I felt
reflected my beliefs, values and possibly something else that is hard
to describe. In short, perhaps passion. Over time I realized that it
would probably be wiser to accept things as is if I ever hoped to be
employed. Making the sale was difficult though. I think perhaps people
think I'm lazy, or uniformed, because I did not work (except for
academic things) in college. Or was it emotion? Ideas out of place? I
was also affected by many of the same family things growing up.

I have an interest in physics, electronics, economics, systems, etc. I
think that if I ever hope to use my education, and share what I have
learned, I need to do something amazing. I could go back to school,
take on a lot of debt, and just hope that I get enough good grades to
impress enough people (and not have them think I'd get bored when
trying to get a job). Or I could learn things on my own, participate
in projects, and hope that people receive me with open arms.

Since 2007 when I discovered Polywell nuclear fusion I've gained new
perspective on the world. I never actually built a fusion reactor, but
I did try to learn what was behind them. This motivated me to read
lots of books, and my desire to do other things to explore my
uniqueness as an individual led to even more books. GNU/Linux
facilitated my graduate work, and I can relate to it's philosophy
through my many frustrations. Open source is great, because I don't
have to worry so much about my skills wasting away. Being at the
university also helps. I also don't have to manufacture things or do
anything special to have excitement about it.

But you know, how much can you actually get from someone who hasn't
experienced that much real employment? Because of that automatically
people see me in a certain way. And my views may not be necessarily
realistic for lack of experience. But whatever it is, it seems I have
have found a lot of energy and my friends seem to notice. I think
about what I am learning more too.

But would this model help people in the real world? I feel that had it
existed it could have helped me growing up, but that is my own
personal experience. In addition to studying, a lot of my peers spent
their time drinking beer, socializing, and playing and/or watching
sports. And most seemed to have more money. Now most seem to have even
more money, and spend time on Facebook talking about things they have
bought or families that they are raising. Their educational level is
hard to discern. Not many seem to be posting things about hacking,
making or things that might suggest deep insight. But not everyone
fits that.

I guess what matters is whether it will work or not, and whether it
truly will benefit others. For that both an experiment and
conversation will help. Thank you Samuel for referring me to Michael.
Milton, I am not certain what it will do yet.

I am not certain what resilience truly means. I'm definitely bothered
by the wastefulness brought upon by obsolescence of products. It would
be much better I think if we knew how they worked so we could reuse
the them (I'm saying the parts) in other things. We've had this
problem at the hackerspace. We have lots of stuff around that if we
had the blueprint, it would be much better. If we knew how this
blueprint connected to other things I personally think that would be
even better.

On a separate issue. In graduate school there were people there that
seemed really lost. I mean they were doing their work, but didn't seem
to have a joy about it. There also was not a lot of organization, and
it was hard to find things.

Outside of school, there are people that I know could go to graduate
school but didn't. It was frustrating to me that I could not seem to
sell them on thinking more deeply about things, or when they said I
was really smart (but did not have the confidence or belief that they
could do it themselves). Still others just weren't there. I've seen
those who weren't there at the hackerspace. I question why, and think
the world would be a better place if this could be tapped into.

"
Roberto Verzola is to my mind the political economist who has done
most in studying this, see
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Commons_Economics ; Wolfgang
Hoeschele is planning an ambitious database based on a Needs,
Organisational REsources, (I forgot what the A stands for)


I'm  sure that the proposed modelling effort will contribute to this
field; if you are ideologically open, you may also want to talk with
people like Paul Cockshott and the people of the Center for Transition
Science at UNAM in Mexico City; who are very good at econometric
modelling and interested in a cybernetic planning revival, "

I still have to think more about this. I was reading over it a bit today.

I might have seen something about this today. Someone was talking
about how technologies were allowing us (or could? ) to become more
mobile, and that people really didn't have to be co located. I don't
remember what technologies that they were referring.

"Peer to peer processes in addition should be defined as geography
independent, historically nomads, hunter gatherers and technomads in
the modern age all show this to be true."

I hope to write soon.


On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Brent Shambaugh
<brent.shambaugh at gmail.com> wrote:

I'm feeling that this is shaped by my own personal experience? I'm
willing, but should I risk putting it out there?







--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/







--
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation



More information about the Python-list mailing list