Who's Developing P2P-L2G Related Software?
Nathan Cravens
Dear Nathan, Sam:
our p2p friend phoebe moore, co-creator of the p2p research group, will be organizing a conference on 'media ecologies' and asked me for some suggestions
one of them would be 'media platforms for peer production and open collaboration' which could bring a few people together now working on similar collaborative platform ideas ...
In this case, this is tentative and depending on funding and where people have to come from etc.., a new names of people would be useful .. the idea is to give them the opportunity to discuss some ways of combining efforts
the presentations for the conference should include: 1) what is lacking now; 2) what to think of commercial platforms a la facebook: 3) what are possible ways forward ...
MichelOn Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Nathan Cravens <knu...@gmail.com> wrote:_______________________________________________Hi Sam,I'm well rested now. Thanks ;)OpenKollab needs an open architectural base so it can support a variety of small group developers already at work on specific projects such as your own. Now we need guys like you to focus on creating that center from which all varieties might flourish. I am now creating a process model with this group as a template to begin to see what people's needs are in forming projects outside organizational boundaries.Matt Cooperrider began a subproject within OK to create a meetup.com OpenKollab group.From what I hear, and soon to explore further, is meetup.com is not just a platform that builds face-to-face meetings, but a project tool as well, with virtual conference features and such. My recollection of meetup.com is a few years old, back when it was just a face-to-face tool. From what I gather, Matt is forming this to surface a core team of developers for the OpenKollab process and platform to better distinguish between discussion and development. Matt has a contact within the meetup.com development team. That should be helpful.There are a few coders in this project, I just need to get in touch with them directly to see what they want to do.I also need to get in touch with everyone that wants to develop the process model.And artists as well...I have learned from constructing web based learning systems that the way you set out to create tools is not going to be universally re-usable, but instead will probably meet the needs of a significant niche in the long tail of needs.OK must meet the niche and the entirety of the long tail of needs. The models I am attempting to build with this community will simply be an open template to inspire the do-it-all web-to-DIY to come. I'm only attempting to get the ball rolling on presenting a better way to link everyone into one open interface where everything is socially networked (people, interests, projects, designs, land, materials, ecologies, ect). I really hope my intentions are becoming clearer. I just want to see where you might fit into this, because it seems what you're doing now, like with FLOWS, is vital to OK without altering much of what you're already doing.What this means is that you'll need to decide whether you want to dedicate to serving that niche, or if you want to help a broader base.Both. I hope that is now clear.if broader base, your tools and processes and the way that they can be configured need to be highly adaptable and changeable. So, the above description does have adaptability and evolve-ability in some ways, but is tightly coupled and hard wired in others.I agree. Like in terms of the consensus assumption I posed, groups should decide whether consensus is necessary or not or of what form of governance they want with each defined process. A consensus approach might be (a potential 'is') default setting or template created by another community.I really think we're on the same page here, Sam, it just seems I need to better express the openness for a decision path after describing each process. I've made the assumption the reader can pick or add to each described process. I'll be sure to clarify this as we move forward. I suppose in a way I have by describing these models as sessions. (See: http://wiki.openkollab.com/wagn/Process_Model) The OK group did a process session before I arrived previously titled spec and changed to Process Model Session 1, so now on the wagn three sessions are listed. I hope this representation will demonstrate the flexibility of the model without getting lost or leaving something without a direction at all.I hope you might attract some readings that relate to systems or process modeling and development so that can improve that design if necessary. I'll add them to Resources.I don't want this group to end up like the Open Manufacturing list. This is why I came aboard quickly while the iron is clearly hot, because I know after a measure of time people will fall into assumptive traps and stagnate. This is not to say I think the OM list is a failure or that the people there are inept, quite the contrary. It is a really great list in terms of other lists that came before it. Brilliant people are discussing brilliant things and posting news and other media that relate to the subjects we've discussed. Its now well established as a learning community and discussion group with just a handful of highly active participants like Paul and Bryan, (that may well have kept the list alive) but now as the group has exceeded 200 subscribers, more folk are coming into the discussive mix. The ideas I wanted to pursue at the time when forming the OM list were too vague to be of much help to anything like OK if it were to start then. By the time I developed a pretty good idea in the direction OK is pursuing, the group had already settled into a pattern that many other discussion lists have. What I'm coming to understand by watching the OK community come alive is that without "real time engagement" links within the group are diminished from each other and the results are what you find in the majority of e-mail based discussion lists today. I'm glad I started the group, its a great group, and it will continue to add to the theoretical work now being applied to OK.Now is the chance to note to Matt that a general discussion about this area is already available and that we can keep the existing OK list development focused. If we do sense more general discussion surfacing, we can start new lists that distinguish between the two. I say this from experience, when Bryan Bishop tried to establish a development discussion group for OM it flopped. I could go into why, but that's fodder for another discussion, one I'd rather have at OM. I'll start one if you're interested, but I'm more interested in developing OK with you. ;)The metaphor for architecture for a malleable collaboration base is "small pieces loosely joined". Many small reusable and reconfigurable parts, all optional, and the whole systems itself optional. You want to make it really easy to add new tools, or for people to work with their existing tools in conjunction with yours. On top of that, I would not even start to design and build tools until you actually have some real world people to work with, who are asking for web based collab tools, and let them drive the design. But, that is just me.I agree. Let the user's drive the needs, then develop solutions. In this universal architecture there must be a series of "project templates" or solutions that are stored in a user friendly directory to use and revise when needed. These revisions then add to the template repository. This process can apply not only to projects--but all things--anything imaginable. So long as we keep it an open, transparent, and as gift economic as possible I'm very confident the "anything imaginable" will be a good thing for more people than what platform or "conditions creators" we have available today.The 'people' >> 'interest' >> 'project' >> 'design' >> 'resources' as a process formula (or something like that) will found the pursuit of the many aims to come. Its just a matter of "what do you want to do and how can we apply that to the OK platform." The user is maximized by OpenKollab--this vital link--which connects the person to the world that person may have an interest, and in easily pursuing these interests, when using this platform, the actions benefit the world. We're already seeing this development in the many process outlines that have come before as, Sam, you've mentioned--from Memex before to Facebook and Deepqa today. If we, even as a small group, keep our heads up, our eyes clear, and have an active sincere interest in one another, the trust from within our group will spread to others to better develop the OK platform as we call it presently, and so we have ourself that little everything module in no time--safe and sound. ;)Nathan
p2presearch mailing list
p2pre...@listcultures.org
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
--
Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research: http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
ecd
enough. (/r9k/ -> anarchy discussion -> disclosed some projects of
mine & solicited interest/asked about extant work -> someone linked
Bryan Bishop's page -> "Yo! First post in this group"...)
- - - - - - - - SKIP UNLESS YOU'RE INTERESTED IN MY PROJECTS:
The project I described in the aforementioned thread was essentially
an online (but downloadable) "tech tree". (No, nothing to show at this
point. :( ) Since I anticipate the related tools (mainly data
visualization & interchange (formats, languages, etc.)) will end up
being pretty versatile, I was going to integrate them into a general-
purpose collaboration-oriented website (and other services, if I could
afford it and there was interest), where I'd also host the major
projects that I personally wanted to develop with the tools:
* the tech tree (multicontextual (historical (from all perspectives)/
[bio/psycho/socio]logical/cosmic/metaphysical contexts describing the
development and applications of the various techs), and ground-up
(such that someone who could read and had infinite time could proceed
from step one ("find stones that look like this, mash them together
such that they spark, collect hot sparks in dry fibrous material...",
etc.) to building space ships. Yes, I've heard of the Foundation
books. :P But no, I've not read them.)
* major subsets of the tech tree (significant enough to people I care
about/my own interests to warrant their own project pages (while still
referencing&building upon the main body of data)):
-primitive technology (sticks & stones, live off the land, etc.)
-chemical (substances, uses, algorithms, models, etc)
-CS stuff (for the development of "fluid" operating systems, another
project I've an interest in.)
-biological (...I think there's already something like this... MIT?)
-materials (processes and tools for production, measurement,
evaluation, etc.)
-tools (measurement, manipulation, etc.)
-salvage (where to find what in presently available artifacts, why
they're there, and how you can use them)
-reverse-engineering (processes, results, tools, etc.)
* smaller projects
-"nomad gardens" - like wwoof, sort of:
-social aspect: folks list resources/work they have and when
they're available, travellers use them/do it.
-ecological aspect: social aspect interwoven with data on local
ecologies (eg someone has seeds of a native fruiting plant, someone
passing through can pick up those seeds, wrap them in seedballs (from
someone else local who has mud & compost), and disperse them while
they're in town, perhaps meeting some nice people and seeing (and
improving) some nice natural sites on the way.)
- more stuff I have written down somewhere, but can't remember off
hand...
In building a site around this tree, I imagine people (at least
myself) could do write-ups (eg "Using the data in the multimeter
nodes, I've built my own. Here's how I did it..."), and I would feel
immensely fulfilled if people actually devised and contributed novel
techs using the data I hope to accumulate & organize.
I have two ideas that, while probably unoriginal, I think might
distinguish this project:
1) on top of all that data, you could overlay data structures that
organize it however you like. You could then share those structures,
edit them, make meta-structures, search algorithms (also sharable!),
etc..
2) Up/downloading & persistence - take relevant data with you, keep
your structures and the data they contain sync'd to whatever (and
whoever[']s[']) version you like.
Anyway, one day collaboratron.org will host something awesome.
(Nothing for you there, yet. (Unless you live in central NC, and even
then, there's nothing you can't find in this email.))
In the meantime, definitely interested in others' work, and any
instances of projects related to the ones I've listed. If it's already
done, I won't feel sad... as long as it's done RIGHT! (Dammit!) :P
SO THAT'S MY SPIEL! And I've only replied to the sight of a list of
similar projects, and not the rest of the message...
- - - - - - - -UNSKIP
What can I help with? Perhaps it would be nice to have a master list
(on someone's wiki or something) of who wants/needs what capabilities
(and where they want them - what hardware/microarchitectures/devices/
modes..), and what currently delivers (free/os or not). I guess I'm
asking you specifically (Hi, Nathan! Pleased to meet you :) ) to put
some more detail on that page of resources you've started? I see a
list of projects, but I don't have a list of the concrete wants/needs
that they address. Perhaps the rest of you have established enough of
a group-mind to know what the others speak of when mentioning some
project, but I haven't had the initiation.
What exactly do various people want to do? I know what I want to do,
and I have /some/ technical ability, and if there are already projects
towards similar ends I'd be happy to lend a hand in whatever way I
can. (By the way, I'm glad to see folks here seem cool with each other
working on essentially the same problems in their own way.)
Or *on reading the "context" at the end of your message* is it this
clarity I'm asking for that everyone is asking of everyone else? :P
If so, let me be clear:
1) I too have an interest in collaborative activity (towards
"abundance" and solving immediate problems towards a better quality of
life), and any tools that can facilitate that.
2) I too am working on a suite of information tools relevant to
collaboration.
3) I am willing to contribute mind/coding power (humble as it may be)
to other collaborative projects.
4) In the way of platforms, I don't know of anything more than you
have listed. (But I definitely keep my eyes open.)
5) My brain tends to shut down when conversations get too abstract.
Please keep this in mind when communicating with me. I like hard
facts, objectives, and a clear context. (...But when I've completed my
Magnum Opus and I'm finally out from under the thumb of scarcity, I
will thoroughly enjoy philosophizing and mind-masturbating all over
the place - Now with greater [augmented?] intelligence and
experience!)
Here's hoping at least some of what I wrote was on-topic,
-Eric
On Aug 8, 7:31 am, Nathan Cravens <knu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Michel, Phoebe, Hackers
> This is an information and developer gathering mission.
> I intend to see to it everyone benefits.
> I hope you might as well.
>
> Peer-to-Peer Local-to-Global Platform
>
> There's a particular platform I'm developing with the
> peer-to-peer local-to-global (P2P-L2G) platform makes a distinction from the
> traditional notion of social networking software by expressing the virtual
> as it represents physical environments with the option when wanted to
> manipulate distant physical environments from a computer in a collaberative
> manner.
>
> Who's doing this already?
>
> Closed but exists, leaning toward this area:
>
> Meetup.com
> What others?
>
> In Development:
>
> Ted Hall with 100K Garageshttp://www.100kgarages.com/
>
> Paul Fernhout with OSCOMAKhttp://www.oscomak.net/
>
>
> Smári McCarthy with Tangible Bithttp://tangiblebit.com/
> Then there's Sam with FLOWS -- not a L2G platform itself, but a core
> architecture that removes code redundancies and in practice assures all
> What else?
>
> Related:
>
> http://www.thingiverse.com/
>
> What else?
>
> At OpenKollab we're at the networking and formulation stage, amplifying
> early for collective attenuation. Real time engagement in the form of irc
> chat/Skype and a flexible platform (wagn) is the secret sauce at present.
> We're open to other platforms. We're also using a discussion list cc'd.
>
> From...http://wiki.openkollab.com/Home
> collaboration. Add
> <http://wiki.openkollab.com/wagn/%3Ca_href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.open...>
> People <http://wiki.openkollab.com/wagn/People> you know, like yourself,
> set of Principles
> follow and what Platform <http://wiki.openkollab.com/wagn/Platform> we use.
>
> My present area of focus and the focus of this topic:
>
> Hack on...
>
> Nathan
> knu...@gmail.com
>
> If not already, please read the contents attached for further context:
> (thanks in advance for allowing this anti-spam to distribute throughout your
> networks)
>
>
> > Dear Nathan, Sam:
>
> > our p2p friend phoebe moore, co-creator of the p2p research group, will be
> > organizing a conference on 'media ecologies' and asked me for some
> > suggestions
>
> > one of them would be 'media platforms for peer production and open
> > collaboration' which could bring a few people together now working on
> > similar collaborative platform ideas ...
>
> > In this case, this is tentative and depending on funding and where people
> > have to come from etc.., a new names of people would be useful .. the idea
> > is to give them the opportunity to discuss some ways of combining efforts
>
> > the presentations for the conference should include: 1) what is lacking
> > now; 2) what to think of commercial platforms a la facebook: 3) what are
> > possible ways forward ...
>
> > Michel
>
> > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Nathan Cravens <knu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Hi Sam,
> >> I'm well rested now. Thanks ;)
>
> >> OpenKollab needs an open architectural base so it can support a variety of
> >> small group developers already at work on specific projects such as your
> >> own. Now we need guys like you to focus on creating that center from which
> >> all varieties might flourish. I am now creating a process model with this
> >> group as a template to begin to see what people's needs are in forming
> >> projects outside organizational boundaries.
>
> >> a platform that builds face-to-face meetings, but a project tool as well,
>
> > --
> > Work:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University- Research:
> >http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> > P2P Foundation:http://p2pfoundation.net -http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Bryan Bishop
> Yo! First post in this group. Found my way here via 4chan, oddly
> enough. (/r9k/ -> anarchy discussion -> disclosed some projects of
> mine & solicited interest/asked about extant work -> someone linked
> Bryan Bishop's page -> "Yo! First post in this group"...)
Huh, I haven't hung out in /r9k/ on 4chan in a while- or in fact,
ever- so I'm glad to see that you somehow made your way here anyway.
> - - - - - - - - SKIP UNLESS YOU'RE INTERESTED IN MY PROJECTS:
>
> The project I described in the aforementioned thread was essentially
> an online (but downloadable) "tech tree". (No, nothing to show at this
> point. :( ) Since I anticipate the related tools (mainly data
Yep, you're in the right place. This is what we're mainly working on
here. The project idea has been mentioned in the past (decades ago)
hundreds of times over, but nobody has sat down and done it. I found
fenn (one of the other committers) by searching around for people
interested in David Gingery, and we've been working on this project
ever since we met. Smari and Sam Rose and a few others also started
emailing around last year about implementing this tech tree.
You're welcome to view our progress.
In particular, you can see a taxonomy of manufacturing processes here:
http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/taxonomy.yaml
You can see some of the details filled out here:
http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/processes.yaml
You can see an example "package" in skdb, a package for a generic screw:
http://adl.serveftp.org/skdb/packages/screw/
Ultimately this is hard to explain to individuals who are unfamiliar
with the concept of a "tech tree", or "tech graph", or unfamiliar with
"apt-get" or other free and open source software package managers.
These days I just tend to tell the diybio folks and the
openmanufacturing folks that it's "apt-get but for hardware". If you
haven't seen the xkcd sandwich reference,--
And of course, someone put some work into that very project already:
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/27/sudo-make-me-a-sandw.html
So, skdb is "apt-get but for hardware"- the idea is to be able to say
"skdb-get install milling-machine", or "skdb-make robot-maid", and
then get all of the requisite tools either by getting instructions
(computational representations of instructables), or by "opting out"
of the tree and just buying some OEM or proprietary components at a
certain point-- which I only mention because it's common that people
just want a kit, or don't want to have to forge every metal component
that they require to carry out their herculean feats.
> visualization & interchange (formats, languages, etc.)) will end up
> being pretty versatile, I was going to integrate them into a general-
> purpose collaboration-oriented website (and other services, if I could
> afford it and there was interest), where I'd also host the major
> projects that I personally wanted to develop with the tools:
So, one front-end idea that I have recently been bouncing around is
called "djangit". It's a python + django + git + wiki frontend system.
The idea is that many people don't want to hear about the guts of
skdb, but at the same time there's no reason to ignore proper revision
control systems; simultaneously, implementing in django means that the
python modules for skdb can be hooked in easily for rendering of the
package data (like the screw package), etc., while still allowing
human input over the web if someone so desires. At the moment djangit
isn't quite functional because I've been neglecting it for the past
few weeks.
> * the tech tree (multicontextual (historical (from all perspectives)/
> [bio/psycho/socio]logical/cosmic/metaphysical contexts describing the
> development and applications of the various techs), and ground-up
> (such that someone who could read and had infinite time could proceed
> from step one ("find stones that look like this, mash them together
> such that they spark, collect hot sparks in dry fibrous material...",
> etc.) to building space ships. Yes, I've heard of the Foundation
> books. :P But no, I've not read them.)
In your spare time, you might want to read more about what we've
previously said about bootstrapping on this list--
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/2279e9a23f644639
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/e4c375acce772250
http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/browse_thread/thread/113d5a39898e061a?hide_quotes=no#msg_2000b6278e1af0ea
> * major subsets of the tech tree (significant enough to people I care
> about/my own interests to warrant their own project pages (while still
> referencing&building upon the main body of data)):
One of the problems that I continue to come across is that many of the
"open source hardware" sites on the web are just keeping photographs
of their information, which isn't useful because there's actual
engineering information involved that should be uploaded (like a CAD
file, etc.). But ultimately, yes, just like the alioth server on
debian, it would be useful to have a way to link to individual
projects and their presence on the web, yes.
> -primitive technology (sticks & stones, live off the land, etc.)
> -chemical (substances, uses, algorithms, models, etc)
> -CS stuff (for the development of "fluid" operating systems, another
> project I've an interest in.)
> -biological (...I think there's already something like this... MIT?)
> -materials (processes and tools for production, measurement,
> evaluation, etc.)
> -tools (measurement, manipulation, etc.)
> -salvage (where to find what in presently available artifacts, why
> they're there, and how you can use them)
> -reverse-engineering (processes, results, tools, etc.)
Yep, we seem to be in agreement.
> In building a site around this tree, I imagine people (at least
> myself) could do write-ups (eg "Using the data in the multimeter
> nodes, I've built my own. Here's how I did it..."), and I would feel
> immensely fulfilled if people actually devised and contributed novel
> techs using the data I hope to accumulate & organize.
> I have two ideas that, while probably unoriginal, I think might
> distinguish this project:
That's one part that the debian community (among others) has solved.
It is well known that engineering is not necessarily the most easy
task in the world because you can't just "engineer de novo"- it would
be pointless to engineer everything under the sun from scratch each
time you build it, right? So for this reason, there are already
"package maintainers" in the skdb community that accept projects from
others and help them "package them up" into the packaging format. This
way, everyone can just sit at their computer and say "sudo make me a
sandwich" and the computer handles all of the details like ordering
inventory, or printing out new lego-manual-style instructions for how
to assemble parts into a system that you wanted, etc. For those who
run shops or who have large machinery laying around, it would be ideal
to allow those machines to assemble the components for you, but
that'll lead this discussion off topic fairly quickly. ;-)
> 1) on top of all that data, you could overlay data structures that
> organize it however you like. You could then share those structures,
> edit them, make meta-structures, search algorithms (also sharable!),
> etc..
> 2) Up/downloading & persistence - take relevant data with you, keep
> your structures and the data they contain sync'd to whatever (and
> whoever[']s[']) version you like.
Yeah, that's called a version or revision control system.
> What can I help with? Perhaps it would be nice to have a master list
> (on someone's wiki or something) of who wants/needs what capabilities
> (and where they want them - what hardware/microarchitectures/devices/
> modes..), and what currently delivers (free/os or not). I guess I'm
We have some of this in the skdb/inventory/ folder but it's not
complete. Smari was working on a web interface to this, but he hasn't
showed up in the IRC channel (#hplusroadmap on freenode) in a few
weeks so I'm not sure what his status is.
> asking you specifically (Hi, Nathan! Pleased to meet you :) ) to put
> some more detail on that page of resources you've started? I see a
> list of projects, but I don't have a list of the concrete wants/needs
> that they address. Perhaps the rest of you have established enough of
> a group-mind to know what the others speak of when mentioning some
> project, but I haven't had the initiation.
I have absolutely no idea what Nathan is doing with yet another
project. We have a lot of momentum here that he's neglecting, and I've
invited him to learn more on numerous opportunities, but maybe I'm
just getting grumpy and old and grumpy.
> What exactly do various people want to do? I know what I want to do,
> and I have /some/ technical ability, and if there are already projects
> towards similar ends I'd be happy to lend a hand in whatever way I
> can. (By the way, I'm glad to see folks here seem cool with each other
> working on essentially the same problems in their own way.)
I suggest starting off by joining the IRC channel (#hplusroadmap) and
saying hi, hanging around and seeing what's up. No doubt that you'll
slowly start to get the picture of what some of us are doing (or not
doing).
> 2) I too am working on a suite of information tools relevant to
> collaboration.
Great. I hope you know your toolchains well :-).
> 3) I am willing to contribute mind/coding power (humble as it may be)
> to other collaborative projects.
Fantastic, I will eat your brain.
> 5) My brain tends to shut down when conversations get too abstract.
> Please keep this in mind when communicating with me. I like hard
> facts, objectives, and a clear context. (...But when I've completed my
> Magnum Opus and I'm finally out from under the thumb of scarcity, I
> will thoroughly enjoy philosophizing and mind-masturbating all over
> the place - Now with greater [augmented?] intelligence and
> experience!)
Hah. Well. We have a rule in the channel: no philosophy. We commonly
violate it without knowing it, until one of us reminds us of this
fact, and we realize we've all been barking up the wrong tree, and get
back to more practical work.
Anyway, nice to meet you.
Nathan Cravens
> asking you specifically (Hi, Nathan! Pleased to meet you :) ) to put
> some more detail on that page of resources you've started? I see a
> list of projects, but I don't have a list of the concrete wants/needs
> that they address. Perhaps the rest of you have established enough of
> a group-mind to know what the others speak of when mentioning some
> project, but I haven't had the initiation.
I have absolutely no idea what Nathan is doing with yet another
project. We have a lot of momentum here that he's neglecting, and I've
invited him to learn more on numerous opportunities, but maybe I'm
just getting grumpy and old and grumpy.