Where such Holochain currencies are issued and accepted by one party each: yes, then these would be very similar to coupons.
The reason we could not use any public ledger protocol for PayCoupons’ coupons was however that our coupon exchange algorithm (network bartering) could not be implemented in a privacy-protecting way with any current blockchain technology. Without that algorithm, coupons are not really useful though. So in case that Holochain has coupon-like currencies I’d be interested how they facilitate their exchange …
At this point, there is a lot of material about commons-based governance out there based on the work of the Nobel Prize winning Elinor Ostrom.
We need off the shelf frameworks, templates and software that make it easy to adopt commons-based governance for projects.
@Peer At the same time the educated middle-class is more busy than ever with work days consisting of 8-11 hour workdays (including about 2 hour commute for some), taking care of kids, having Netflix competing with its main competitor being a biological need called Sleep and hours of “sousveillance” looking at other people’s lives instead of interacting with each other and society. I think you’re on to something but I believe that all people have an inherent will which there is a constant battle from different actors to attract.
@johncoate Definitely. Maybe the narratives around these issues such as the planet’s ecosystems health and overall system health are erasing the motivation when the narratives need to enable people’s will? Regarding the driverelss car-narrative I believe big reason to the belief in this is that it has strong compelling arguments for investors and politicians interested in growth and maintaining current mainstream policies connected to measurements like GDP. This is simply because it requires to build new (electric) superior cars/vehicles (for few individuals), infrastructure, support and maintenance systems as well as autonomy systems which is more attractive than the more financially cost-heavy investments of big transit system which are less flexible, more capital intensive and has less revenue per person (one car/person vs one train or hyperloop/many people). This is more interesting even though it’s admitted that it’s much more difficult and complex (i.e. people being involved in traffic) to build self-driving systems for cars than for airplanes as there are more vehicles and objects on the ground than in the air.
@2RowFlow Thanks for the tip. As I understand it, Holochain is a technical solution trying to replace the Internet, dependant and within this technical and social infrastructure that the solution wants to replace? It would need to be housed within an alternative physical and social infrastructure than the current Internet in order to replace it right (and then have a surge of users onboarding Holochain instead of the platforms on the web as we know it)?
@zaunders I’m thinking my post is more perspectives and merely asking: what if we would try things differently as a society, based on what we are learning from the current state of affairs? And I’m trying to not jump to the solutions be it technical or social ones.
@johncoate I’m not sure it’s “winner takes all”, I’m thinking it is more like everyone takes everything? Regardless of ideology, it seems that responsibility to consider and act for the wholeness of the system is abscent.
@alcinnz Yes there are two issues and the primary is on how we run the Internet as a whole and an infrastructure. You’re right about BDFL, when starting something on one’s own initiative that becomes a BDFL scenario - however starting with together others, I’m not sure it has to be a BDFL scenario. How this alternative way of governing and developing would work - that’s what I would like to research if I get the fellowship with bursary.
Interesting! How has these materials translated into real-world practice? I know there are practical examples which her research was connected to - but how has it developed?
It might work with the off-the-shelf solutions but the implementation of those - they depend a lot on the process in which they are implemented right? Are they convincing enough as governance systems in comparison to existing systems? How have they been convincing societies and communities so far?
My proposal is to research: How can we organize for a big, complex and social multi-stakeholder challenge like the development of the Internet? A challenge which at first seems like a web of technical challenges and where it seems every issue can be solved with technical solutions - but in reality perhaps in essence is a social issue at its roots?
My proposal for a track at the distributed conference would be to try to arrange distributed participatory processes to try to build the coalition throughout Europe needed to take on the challenge of reshaping the development of the Internet.
(I have not replied to Holochain-replies, unsure how they relate as a technical solution.)
@mattiasx what’s your definition of “infrastructure”? Do you mean the communications hardware on which digital signals travel between devices? Or are you using a different definition?
I’m curious because to me preventing things like Cambridge Analytica’s data peddling is a task more at the level of data governance rather than at the level of infrastructure governance. Maybe I’m using a different definition?
I don’t even know what “loss of information” means. And if I did, I might believe loss of information is a feature, not a weakness.
No, the DNS root servers are spread out over the planet. One is in my home town, Stockholm.
Over a long time – decades, or centuries. Governing the Commons lists, if memory serves, six long-term stable of managing (limited, renewable) resources without top-down control: water management in the Philippines and Eastern spain, forestry in Switzerland and Japan, fisheries in Eastern Canada and so on.
Since these governance arrangements evolved over a long period of time and tend to have no recorded history, Ostrom never gets to observe such an arrangement gel. The book ends with conditions and even “design principles” that increase their chances of success. Highly recommended.
Maybe of interest for some here:
If the project #TheWeb of Tim Berners-Lee could unite the like-minded dreamers here for the better internet? My input (I’m a printing engineer / information logistics via digital print): a physical network of Things, each of which enables secure access to #TheWeb. And the Things are Public Library PAPER books, with “digital twin access” interfaces - via SMART QR-code stickers, integrated into a book cover / dust jacket. I hope that ubiquity of books and trust to their public roots & non-capitalistic value of Learning will attract Peer-to-Peer book sharers. Including sharing constructive emotions (similar to social media, but without negative and hype, thanks to certain algorithms), collaboration ideas etc. Does it sound viable? https://devpost.com/software/IndiviDUALbooks
Looks like a noble enterprise. How do you deal with copyright?
We enable more decent royalties (for CopyRight/CR owners) flow, secured by blockchain: each book usage is initiated by click at ISBN code
- increased ca. by 20%, thanks to more sales & library loans
- each usage event reflected in the Creative Passport*
- two types of royalties protected, though we could ‘ignore’ CR:
- For Visually Impaired People /VIP***
- For non-VIP: right2copy for private needs.
Issue: it takes time to explain to (legacy/stubborn/greedy) publishers, that they should OPEN books (&eBooks) data, to
- receive +20% royalty
- AND DOUBLE sales from Long Tail** books.
- slide 12, http://bit.ly/oeBookSlides4Aalto
** slide 9, http://bit.ly/oeBookSlides4Aalto
*** via https://www.accessiblebooksconsortium.org/globalbooks/en/
And we start it as Blue Ocean solution: for currently under-served groups, by providing them TRIPLE-A books (Accessible, Affordable, Available), with ‘digital twins’ of contents - adjusted & adjustable in real time - to the unique user:
- VIP make 20% of population, currently served only ca. 1% (by audio books for VIP
- immigrants (books at non-local languages are rare), elderly people (digitally illiterate) who need SPECIALIZED books in ONE UNIQUE copy each, like special fonts for dyslexic/ Large Print Books.
And (referring to Copyright question) our strongest feature is ISP’s / Copyright protection & enhanced support: see Public Libraries Testimonials, slide 8 https://bit.ly/oeBook4Espoo
We would also be interested in hearing about what motivated you initially to develop this? Was there an initial experience or piece of writing that made you aware of this need?
Hello @VladiKup, that’s a very attractive model. And you are right on the money there, it depends on publishers. They are incredibly powerful, and what they say goes. Let’s hope they come around…
Thanks @alberto! Division of knowledge books into PAPER books & eBooks is inherited from pre-hyperconnected era. Some publishers are starting to understand that*, but the old-timer authors & publishers are still ‘gate-keepers’**, just because they DON’T UNDERSTAND what ‘digital era’ means .
Therefore we need Dutch-like* use cases / to break the legacy (thanks to COVID-19 also); I am trying to persuade Cities-as-MyData-Operators in Finland: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6681127505090359296/
I also explain at slide 9***, that Pareto rule is not working for Long Tail books (Long Tail DOUBLES sales&loans of books).
And the most important is that we’ve sold the issue of royalties, by providing each PHYSICAL book’s loan with THE digital interface, UpCode: a book is send to be printed on-demand via this MyData-approach-conform FINNISH 2D-code (UpCodeworld.com) of book’s UNIQUE ISBN’s token.
The issue: it’s hard to explain how it works to thousands publishers and millions authors The smartest (Finnish) librarians understand though: see slide 13***
*watch 2 min., from 38:00, Dutch publisher refers to the ‘hold’ bestsellers scheme, shown at 30:00 of this video http://bit.ly/oeBookOodiSeminar30min
**“The other problem with the AG’s argument is that it assumes every ebook rental from a library represents a lost sale. This is simply untrue.” https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/284988-the-authors-guild-declares-war-on-digital-library-lending-libraries
https://twitter.com/celia_gov/status/1105424312364871680?s=09 Retail means excessive costs for books, though eBooks are less costly by-design than paper books. It means that eBooks distribution is seriously flawed. Built for pre-digitalized society, eBooks business models need re-design for hyper-connected era.
Maybe you will have better luck than the Internet Archive. They made the decision when lockdowns started to offer a huge selection of scanned books loaned out library style with the idea of doing the public libraries’ job on their behalf while they sort themselves out. But they got sued by the publisher’s association and after their explanation, which I thought was pretty reasonable, was rejected, the Internet Archive withdrew the service. But they are being defended by the EFF and another firm, so the story is far from over.
Thanks @johncoate, for your great example case IA! My comment below, sorry the long read.
Though not being a lawyer, I can judge this case from my (living in EU) perspective, also thanks to being a MyData Founding Member². There are some differences in EU vs. US copyright laws, also in the law systems (continental vs. case law). But ‘FAIR use’ is almost similar in both, and it can be defended in court. For (at least) FOUR DIFFERENT ‘fair use’ cases:
(1) books in Accessible Formats, for Visually Impaired People VIP
(2) for PRIVATE USE
(3) for force-majeur circumstances, like IA did (when pandemia closed public library (PL) services. Some legal opinions here¹)
(4) as a human right case.
FAIR use cases may look different in national legislatures, e.g. U.S. vs. Italian vs. Finnish; in U.S. there’s ‘exhaustion’ of copyright³ (first-sale doctrine) when a book is legally owned, e.g. by buying it or via donation, “forgotten” by Alexander (who inaccurately⁴ referred to Copyright law), quoted By TechRepublic⁵. See very good comments in the IA blog⁶ re. societal effects.
But I play safe (Case I), even though I’d like to defend these cases in court: I’ll start my service for Visually Impaired People (VIP) ONLY, by leveraging The Marrakesh Treaty for VIP (U.S. is also a party, that signed the Treaty): it provides for right to copy (incl. right to order & to receive copy) - of copyrighted books without asking permission from a copyright owner.
In EU nation countries we have a paragraph in Copyright laws: right to make copIES for PRIVATE USE (⁷Art. 12). Up to four copies⁸, by Finnish law, for family members AND closest FRIENDS (Case II).
My plan: to start service #MyData #IndiviDUALbooks (Bœks)
- with ‘fair use case I’, for VIP only;
- then to implement ‘fair use case II’, for PRIVATE uses, in Finland - to EU - to U.S. (maybe). I discussed it with libraries/lawyers in Finland: THOUGH IT’S A LEGAL RIGHT, NO-ONE WISHES TO RISK A LEGAL BATTLE. So, I may use ‘a trick’: data cooperatives¹² instead of PL.
- ‘fair use case III’, for data cooperatives, see below¹², in Finland - to EU - to U.S. (maybe)
- ‘fair use case IV’, as-a-human-right, for force-majeur (pandemia), where applicable.
Cases III/IV - IF SUPPORTED by strong communities (like Edgeryders/ MyData).
I like what IA did, but with all my due respect, I don’t (yet) have resources to fight in court against publisher monsters. I can only try to explain them that they lose more than gain, if opposing Bœks (like in above Dutch-like* use cases).
Also like against Amazon’s business model killing local businesses: my idea is here⁹.
The Accessible Formats of books, provided by Bœks innovation - is even an OBLIGATION for public services, by Accessibility laws. Though not enforceable yet, similar to GDPR’s Article 20 (data portability). Nevertheless, I promote the Accessibility AND cost-efficiency of the Bœks.
The U.S. Copyright Office¹º stated that "[t]he tangible nature of a copy is a defining element of the first sale doctrine and critical to its rationale."¹¹ Therefore, when DATA is not rival, a right to enjoy the PERSONAL DATA assets don’t need to be protected in courts (like the threat to IA). It is a HUMAN RIGHT, like the right-to-internet in Finnish law, or the First Amendment in U.S. law. This is a long topic, but there’s a good paper, that I plan to leverage for my next level (‘fair use case III’) in implementation my Bœks, as-‘The Bœks for The Web’: ‘property-owning democracy’ through personal data platform cooperatives’¹².
I consider Bœks a TRANSFORMATIVE use case, it’s a ground for asserting Bœks as FAIR use case: as we apply access to PERSONAL DATA assets into a PL book form-factor: MyData Label-Button approach / MyData Operators best practices access in1click at The Button,
- for PERSONAL benefits, non-accessible without TRANSFORMATION into Bœks.
Re. ‘the exclusive right of reproduction’ vs. ‘right to copy’ (⁷"exclusive right to control
a work by reproducing it AND by making it available to the public", Section 2).
Quote from EFF: “That (CDL program) means that if the Archive and its partner libraries have only one copy of a book, then only one patron can borrow it at a time, just like any other library.”
My Bœk solution has three sub-solutions:
(1) is similar to CDL, but in a PHYSICAL / PAPER form. It is (to be) supported by the novelty of Finnish law: royalty is paid to copyright owners when a book is loaned by a PL, also for e-books. A Bœk, when (a scan file is) sent to be printed, signals ‘a loan event’ to the relevant Finnish authority (state fund Sanasto), that provides royalty payments, for VIP
- or even if a book is ‘loaned’ (a forthcoming, Peer-to-Peer, loan of a Bœk, received from a PL) by a natural person, i.e. not by a PL, but leveraging the PL’s data / resources. Thus protecting copyright holders’ economical interests / leaving them off the argument "IA’s NEL is vile"¹³.
(2) When a physical book owner uses his/her right to produce & share a (legally obtained) Bœk copy in a paper form (or CDL-like e-book, INSIDE a Bœk’s DUAL form-factor; it’s like CDL from IA) FOR PRIVATE USE (a fair use case, for e.g. family member).
This case differs from (1), as a PL patron / a data cooperative member utilizes FOR FREE the Bœk printers, owned by PL / or by the data cooperative (like MyData Coop).
2 € eco-deposit applies though, like a deposit in a sale price for a plastic bottle;
(3) 10+2=12 € deposit applies, if a PL patron ‘purchases’ / prints himself/herself a Bœk, non-available commercially/from PL, via a PL database resources. This includes author royalty.
Case (3) differs
- from case (1), by SEAMLESSNESS of non-availability of a book in case 1, for non-VIPeople, i.e. a patron must fulfill the request to share a Bœk (by postal service) - if such happens;
- from case (2), by economical constraints: if a patron prints for ownership (i.e. not shares) more than one Bœk per year.
⁸In Finnish language: instruction for users (2-4 copies allowed for family & closest friends “perheen ja läheisen ystäväpiirin välillä”; SUBJECT TO remuneration to copyright owners by state fund), from Finnish Copyright authority https://tekijanoikeus.fi/tekijanoikeus/luvallinen-kaytto/
I repeat links, they were not linkable (incl. forgotten two links ⁵ and ⁶) in above comment:
⁸ In Finnish language: instruction for users (2-4 copies allowed for family & closest friends “perheen ja läheisen ystäväpiirin välillä”; SUBJECT TO remuneration to copyright owners by state fund), from Finnish Copyright authority https://tekijanoikeus.fi/tekijanoikeus/luvallinen-kaytto/
It is clear that you have really thought this through. Good luck and please let us know how it’s going.