Slashdot Mirror
The Next Social Revolution?
Cryofan writes "In a recent interview, Howard Rheingold (author of Smart Mobs) discussed the possibility of a 'new economic system' born of 'unconscious cooperation' embodied by such technologies as Google links and Amazon lists, Wikipedia, wireless devices using unlicensed spectrum, Web logs, and open-source software. Rheingold speculates that 'the technology of the Internet, reputation systems, online communities, mobile devices...may make some new economic system possible....We had markets, then we had capitalism, and socialism was a reaction to industrial-era capitalism. There's been an assumption that since communism failed, capitalism is triumphant, therefore humans have stopped evolving new systems for economic production.' However, Rheingold is worried that established companies with business models that are threatened by these new technologies could 'quash such nascent innovations as file-sharing -- and potentially put the U.S. at risk of falling behind the rest of the world.'"
Rheingold is worried that established companies with business models that are threatened by these new technologies could 'quash such nascent
innovations as file-sharing
Don't worry, they can only manage this for a very short period of time. They're all ice vendors in the age of the fridge, and it's not a rut that they can simply step out of. They're in the wrong business entirely - technology doesn't just stand aside when a few vested interests complain to Capitol Hill.
Anyone who thinks that human beings are going to work together for the common good, especially in an economics setting, has been smoking too much weed. We don't even have a FAIR capitalistic society yet.
Besides it's one thing to say that new forms of economics should be created, but it's quite another to go out and create that system. And even then, who is to say it won't be too idealistic, or just plain ineffective (communism, etc.)?
The process of evolution is never ending. Some ideas get recycled in a modified form. Look at barter: the trading of goods or services, for goods or services. Has anyone fixed someones computer in exchange for something? Thats how I got my current office chair.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
I think the same can be said of a lot of Democracies these days.
But then I looked around and all I saw was people clawing their way to the top, stepping on each other in a futile grab for something they couldn't reach: "enough." Nobody ever has enough in this society. Nobody has enough money, enough respect or enough love. We are a society of maximizers, always worried about what we're giving up for having something else. "I could take a sick day now, but I have to make my car payment." "I don't like my job, but I'll stay there and be miserable because other jobs don't pay enough."
It won't work on a global scale. All it would take is one person taking advantage of another for the whole thing to collapse.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
It wont be until we can let go of fear that we will be able to evolve into such a perfect 'Star Trek' society where people work for the sake of people, and money isn't used (yay geek reference). But this is semi-irrational since there will always be fear as long as there is death and suffering.
For this system to work would require a major percentage of the global populace to commit to two things. 1) Helping/Aiding others so that they do not suffer and 2) Stopping any single person or group from causing suffering.
So yes, the article has a nice theory behind it, but if I see it in my lifetime, or the lifetime of my great great grandkids, I will be amazed.
"I am the Black Mage! I casts the spells that makes the peoples fall down!" ~8BT
I work for a large and very dominate bio-medical company. One of our products is flow-cytometers. They are used in looking at the relative size, complexity and antibodies a cell possesses. They use lasers, Photo Multiplier tubes,fairly complex electronics and reagents to do this.
Most of the data and techniques that are used are shared by our customers at Purdue
Of course universities are more likely to share data than our pharmaceutical customers but that is to be expected and they do share some data mainly in regards to techniques. Our customers have also started forming user groups and organizing conferences. Because of this format stem cell research, mapping of the human genome, and progress fighting aids and cancer has quickened. I am pretty excited to be a part of it all we even have some custom products that allow our customers to look at bacteria!(much smaller than cells).
What is even more exciting is that our latest generation of instruments are being purchased by people who have never used them before(yay profit!) and are in completely different fields. I always make sure to point them to purdue so even more data can be shared.
Over all I am very optimistic about these developments. In the next 5-10 years I would not be surprised to see major develpments if not cures in all immune system related fields.
"To Err is Human To Forgive is Divine neither of which is Marine Corp Policy"-My SNCOIC
Please repeat after me: capitalism with a hundred thousand government rules and regulations functions the same way as communism. a + 100000*b = c.
Is that a statement I somehow missed while reading Marxist literature?
A capitalist system, even a protective one such as the one found in the U.S., encourages corporations to maximize their profits, and even to be exploitive. In a communist economy, state owned monopolies protect the proletariat at the expense of profits and efficiency.
An effective signature identifies a particular user amongst a base of thousands.
Communism didnt work because people are flat out lazy and greedy. Throughout time, the US and other big countries will lead into this socialism/communism and capitalism will gradually play less of a role as things become more and more mechanized, especially farming. People didnt want to grow crops for the common good, but electricity doesnt seem to care. OSS works because the maker of the software doesnt have to remake it for everyone who wants the software, computers can simply copy it, and not everyone has to contribute; the OSS is meant to be abused by average users with the few who feel they should/want to make something for the common good. If power becomes less of an issue (fusion power obviously), and the few ppl (scientists, related to the people who make open software) will design something (farming or productive robots) for the average lazy user. Communism required too much from the average user.
... potentially put the U.S. at risk of falling behind the rest of the world
Not going to happen - because the US will just swallow up (read: US-Australia Free Trade Agreement) anything that seems to be creeping ahead, thus quashing these technologies in other parts of the world as well.
Greed is not the problem - greed is a pejorative word for self interest. Any system that does not recognize that all human (and most animal and plant) behavior is based on self-interest is doomed to failure.
And self-interest didn't succeed. Nature eventually and inevitably produced humans, and we continued act in self-interest but with more power, destroying ourselves and the world that created us. Essentially, nature's policy of self-interest is doomed eventually to destroy it. Nature's encouragement of greed/self-interest is now something that humanity, if it wants to survive, must overcome.
'unconscious cooperation'
Wouldn't it still be conscience since it's trying to, uhh, earn the most amount of money possible?
There's been an assumption that since communism failed, capitalism is triumphant
China isn't doing so badly. It seems most capitalistic societies are taking a more socialist turn - providing healhcare, welfare, education, etc. Seems capitalism sort of fused with the ideas of communism.
Rheingold is worried that established companies with business models that are threatened by these new technologies
Open source is superior to brand name any day. Linux > windows. Firefox > IE. However, the latter both dominate the market, but Linux and Mozilla still have their fair share. Open source is the only example of REAL capitalism - since it's based on rugged individualism and can compete with huge corperations. That being said, it also forces big companies to innovate their software. You can bet that IE 7 will closely resemble FireFox.
quash such nascent innovations as file-sharing -- and potentially put the U.S. at risk of falling behind the rest of the world.'"
That is a fairly valid assumption, however, file sharing seems to be as rampant as ever. Kazaa, Ares, Gnucleus, eMule... if you want it, it's out there.
Case in point, desire for profit still does give companies incentive to improve upon existing models. The best thing that has ever happened to big corperations was open source - free, creative innovations which they can utilize in their up and coming products. Most of it was way too technologically advanced for the average user (try and explain to your parents how and why you need a 3 partition drive to have Linux and Windows).
"In a Democracy, people get the kind of government they deserve." -Winston Churchill
As technology progresses, goods become more and more commodity, and even replace services. (Where once you hired a maid to come vacuum your floor, now you can buy a Roomba; where once you used the Roomba on your carpet, now you can install metabolic carpet that simply eats the dirt.) Consider the Recording industry and its fight against inevitablity. Why's it fighting so hard? Because its business model is based solely on the scarcity of physical media to store music on and control over distribution of those media. With P2P, that scarcity is obsolete.
Simply, it's incumbent upon businesses to reduce costs, one means of which comes from increased efficiency. Increased efficiency means lower cost per unit produced, which means either more units produced per unit cost, or fewer units produced -- another artificial scarcity. Seeing any knobs inevitably cranking towards zero here?
This is going to happen everywhere, even in our vaunted technology sector, where we're -- were -- paid the "big bucks" because we understood all this high-tech shit. Well, it's been demonstrated that genetic algorithms and such can, ultimately, design faster, more efficient, more powerful, &c chips than humans can. As that technology progresses, we'll have programs writing programs, too. We've got prototype Mickey-D's that don't have any humans at the counter: swipe your card, push some buttons, and then, finally, a person hands you your McNuggets or whatever -- and those humans are replaceable, too. It will, eventually, be cheaper to have some sort of robotic contraption flip your burger, wrap it up and hand it to you than it is to keep bodies on staff.
Intentionally or no, technology obsoletes scarcity, the fundamental thing upon which even the need for capital is based; everything's simply there. Without scarcity, what good is money? The very knob which needs to be cranked up for capitalism to be useful and, to the extent it is, beneficial to society is progressively, unstoppably being cranked down towards zero.
What happens then? Because either it's going to hit zero, or the next Dinosaur Killer's going to strike first, in which case it's all moot anyway. Foregoing the latter, WTF point will capitalism serve?
Now, I'm not remotely arguing that it's been unnecessary all along; we wouldn't be where we are unless the world had turned out exactly as it did. But we're only just beginning the creep into the post-scarcity age. What happens then? One way or another, there will always be some things that are scarce no matter what, but the fundamental fact is, scarcity is, itself, becoming scarce.
And, FTR, communism and socialism have always failed not because there's a market underneath, struggling to get out, but simply because of human greed, be it for wealth, power or whatever else. In a post-scarcity world, does greed even make sense?
Right! You are! No one else would talk about the current election with two parties, leaving out the name of the country and other details, and assume to be understood- but an American. (Ok, I'll cut you some slack: this *is* slashdot, which is located in the US
Now, you know, a lot of the "rest of the world" isn't quite as paranoid about other people wanting to steal their stuff. A lot of us actually believe that the vast majority of the time, most people like to cooperate. And there are enough people that like to act ethically that things like wikipedia and open-source can actually work. Heck, not just work, they can work better than your cut-throat capitalism.
Oh, I should mention this while I'm ranting: the US economy's fortunes have very little to do with your brand of aggressive capitalism. If anything, you're doing well despite it. In the first part of the last century, you folks had a lot of oil, which is essential for fuelling an industrial economy and war machine. That's all. Just like England became wealthy with coal, you became wealthy because of oil- just an accident of history, really.
I believe St. Francis explained that having wealth made you fearful, and wanting to protect it. It was easier for him just to renounce material wealth, so he wouldn't have to worry.
Now, this is a crucial point: the US has been in decline now for some 30 years as an economic power. Your GDP goes up, but you people aren't any happier. This wealth that you accumulated is causing you some nasty "cognitive dissonnance", and you're choosing to resolve it by believing odd notions- like you're somehow superior, and the rest of the world is after you. Not so.
There is no problem with these other economic systems so long as they do not require coercion. People obviously ARE willing to contribute to things like wikipedia, distributed proofreaders, open source projects, peace brigades international, etc, etc... These things WORK. Who are you to say that human nature is evil, in the face of such feats? Humans sure are capable of incredible, unspeakable barbarity. But that's only human realization, quite distinct from human nature, which includes the possibility of either realization. And some systems invite certain types of realization: authoritarian systems invite barbary, systems that give status in exchange for contribution reward giving.
It's not selfless in the dualistic way that is present in judeo-christian (well, mostly christian) morality. The gift economy can't be seen as either selfless or selfish- more like enlightened self-interest. Contribute to a good OSS project, see your ability to charge high consulting fees go up. Neither selfless, nor selfish (or maybe both?)
Ah, there you have it: as far as IP goes, we do have nearly unlimited production capacity. Economists had to come up with the idea of augmenting returns; it's so damned cheap to copy bits that marginal costs keep decreasing. You can't deprive the other guy by making a copy (well, unless you're counting on licensing...).
There's no need. We only need a system that invites better realizations, and that's something that's become possible with a new mode of production. It's a rare thing in human history to be witnesses to such a massive change. That said, I'm afraid a lot of Americans are going to be too afraid to partake in this movement because your accidental wealth has warped your vision, making you see human nature as dark as your leaders manifest it.
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
> AT&T's monopoly was dismembered.
And the ILEC's today cumulatively have more power than AT&T ever did, extending beyond POTS into cellular and broadband. All made possible by cash flow from their POTS monopoly.
> Standard Oil's monopoly was dismembered.
But the dismembered portions were all owned by the same people who owned Standard Oil. What's more, the dismembered portions together made more money that the original Standard Oil.
Identity decentralization != Financial decentralization.
> Labor unions were established.
Talked to the pilots' union at Delta recently? How about United Airlines? Their pensions are not looking too good -- coming soon to a union near you.
> The weekend was created.
Are you classified as a salaried technology professional? Then your hours do not qualify for overtime. In fact, they may not qualify for time, depending on your employer.
Americans in unions are very interested in excercising their political power, what's left of it. But don't stay up late waiting for your 401K to lobby Washington for your children's future.
All US presidents have been "Christians", the current incumbent being one of the more outspoken ones.
Actually, that's not true. The "Founding Fathers", such as Washington, Jefferson, etc. were most likely Deists, if they even considered themselves as following a religion. Of course, the current Christian revisionist historians will swear up and down that "America was founded on Christianity", but it isn't true.
Actually, that's not true. The "Founding Fathers", such as Washington, Jefferson, etc. were Christians, even if they frowned upon some aspects of organized religion at at the time. Of course, the current atheist revisionist historians will swear up and down that "America wasn't founded on Christianity", but it isn't true