- co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
Economy
- that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
- flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of technology.
- continuously updated and improved by community
I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying the
Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation
http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E Land.
Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but with
rules.
- Local Economies
- Social Enterprise- Social responsability
- Direct trade
- No patents
- etc
I will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
Best
Ezequiel
2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
> Economy
> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of technology.
> - continuously updated and improved by community
we will put also numbers for the Open Source Economy similar to the Common
Welfare Matrix.
Before that I want to invite the people in identifying first the
technologies needed for the Economy + The technological values we need in
Europe (In Germany we already added Safety and Quality).
I would make this decision making *open and participative* rather than do
it with few people in Germany, because what we are doing is affecting
Europe. It is a Vision to be owned and shared by everyone interested.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ezequiel <vha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying the
> Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation
> http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
> I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E
> Land. Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but
> with rules.
> - Local Economies
> - Social Enterprise- Social responsability
> - Direct trade
> - No patents
> - etc
> I will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
> Best
> Ezequiel
> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>> Hi everyone,
>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>> GVCS:
>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
>> Economy in Europe.*
>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
>> Economy
>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>> technology.
>> - continuously updated and improved by community
> we will put also numbers for the Open Source Economy similar to the Common
> Welfare Matrix.
> Before that I want to invite the people in identifying first the
> technologies needed for the Economy + The technological values we need in
> Europe (In Germany we already added Safety and Quality).
> I would make this decision making *open and participative* rather than do
> it with few people in Germany, because what we are doing is affecting
> Europe. It is a Vision to be owned and shared by everyone interested.
> Nikolay
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ezequiel <vha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying the
>> Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation
>> http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
>> I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E
>> Land. Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but
>> with rules.
>> - Local Economies
>> - Social Enterprise- Social responsability
>> - Direct trade
>> - No patents
>> - etc
>> I will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
>> Best
>> Ezequiel
>> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>>> GVCS:
>>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
>>> Economy in Europe.*
>>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
>>> Economy
>>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>>> technology.
>>> - continuously updated and improved by community
Hi people! Lets open source this one....Its a fantastic idea and so simple to build. No fuel costs and a great work out! The bicycle lawn mower.
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:28:13 +0200
Subject: [OSE-Europe] Re: [open-e-land] Concrete Vision for the Open Source Economy in Europe
From: vha...@gmail.com
To: open-e-land@googlegroups.com
CC: ose-europe@googlegroups.com; ose-germany@googlegroups.com; ose-italia@googlegroups.com
Yeah, fine!
I like that, put numbers and protocol for the technologies and for the social impact of open sourcing industrial manufacturing, and enterprises.
2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
Hi Ezequiel,
we will put also numbers for the Open Source Economy similar to the Common Welfare Matrix.
Before that I want to invite the people in identifying first the technologies needed for the Economy + The technological values we need in Europe (In Germany we already added Safety and Quality).
I would make this decision making open and participative rather than do it with few people in Germany, because what we are doing is affecting Europe. It is a Vision to be owned and shared by everyone interested.
Nikolay
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ezequiel <vha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying the Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E Land. Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but with rules.
Local EconomiesSocial Enterprise- Social responsability
Direct tradeNo patents
etcI will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
BestEzequiel
2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
Hi everyone,
what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the GVCS:
A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source Economy in Europe.
A Vision:
co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source Economy
that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of technology.
continuously updated and improved by community
I image that we co-define the technological criteria, economic sectors and technologies.
We should involve everyone who is interested in creating this vision. This a vision not just for OSE Europe, but for everyone in Europe.
> Hi people! Lets open source this one....Its a fantastic idea and so
> simple to build. No fuel costs and a great work out! The bicycle lawn mower.
> ------------------------------
> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:28:13 +0200
> Subject: [OSE-Europe] Re: [open-e-land] Concrete Vision for the Open
> Source Economy in Europe
> From: vha...@gmail.com
> To: open-e-land@googlegroups.com
> CC: ose-europe@googlegroups.com; ose-germany@googlegroups.com;
> ose-italia@googlegroups.com
> Yeah, fine!
> I like that, put numbers and protocol for the technologies and for the
> social impact of open sourcing industrial manufacturing, and enterprises.
> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
> Hi Ezequiel,
> we will put also numbers for the Open Source Economy similar to the Common
> Welfare Matrix.
> Before that I want to invite the people in identifying first the
> technologies needed for the Economy + The technological values we need in
> Europe (In Germany we already added Safety and Quality).
> I would make this decision making *open and participative* rather than do
> it with few people in Germany, because what we are doing is affecting
> Europe. It is a Vision to be owned and shared by everyone interested.
> Nikolay
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ezequiel <vha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying the
> Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation
> http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
> I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E
> Land. Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but
> with rules.
> - Local Economies
> - Social Enterprise- Social responsability
> - Direct trade
> - No patents
> - etc
> I will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
> Best
> Ezequiel
> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
> Hi everyone,
> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
> GVCS:
> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
> Economy in Europe.*
> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
> Economy
> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of technology.
> - continuously updated and improved by community
each community have diferent needs
so gvcs sucks(anyway we all know that sucks,only usefull to start the
movement)
and anything similar will too
every single place will also have a diferent economic situation...
2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
> I will send you email when we start the technology identification process.
> Meanwhile you can gather more ideas.
> Thanks,
> Nikolay
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:18 AM, kamala108 freitag <kam...@live.co.uk>wrote:
>> Hi people! Lets open source this one....Its a fantastic idea and so
>> simple to build. No fuel costs and a great work out! The bicycle lawn mower.
>> ------------------------------
>> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:28:13 +0200
>> Subject: [OSE-Europe] Re: [open-e-land] Concrete Vision for the Open
>> Source Economy in Europe
>> From: vha...@gmail.com
>> To: open-e-land@googlegroups.com
>> CC: ose-europe@googlegroups.com; ose-germany@googlegroups.com;
>> ose-italia@googlegroups.com
>> Yeah, fine!
>> I like that, put numbers and protocol for the technologies and for the
>> social impact of open sourcing industrial manufacturing, and enterprises.
>> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>> Hi Ezequiel,
>> we will put also numbers for the Open Source Economy similar to the
>> Common Welfare Matrix.
>> Before that I want to invite the people in identifying first the
>> technologies needed for the Economy + The technological values we need in
>> Europe (In Germany we already added Safety and Quality).
>> I would make this decision making *open and participative* rather than
>> do it with few people in Germany, because what we are doing is affecting
>> Europe. It is a Vision to be owned and shared by everyone interested.
>> Nikolay
>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ezequiel <vha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying the
>> Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation
>> http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
>> I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E
>> Land. Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but
>> with rules.
>> - Local Economies
>> - Social Enterprise- Social responsability
>> - Direct trade
>> - No patents
>> - etc
>> I will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
>> Best
>> Ezequiel
>> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>> Hi everyone,
>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>> GVCS:
>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
>> Economy in Europe.*
>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
>> Economy
>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>> technology.
>> - continuously updated and improved by community
the goal is not to identify the 50 machines for Europe and stick to that,
but to identify important machines for the economic sectors. The difference
I am proposing is to make this identification process Open for another
machines and for other environments.
A Wind Turbine is relevant in Germany, Spain and more places. A simple
tractor, EU-certified can be used and produced by many in Europe. So
identifying a set of machines is not useless and it gives us a better
picture of the Open Source Economy. The vision will unite the different
machines needed in the different environments because it is open for them
and the identification of the machines is iterated continuously.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Jose Bravo <monove...@gmail.com> wrote:
> each community have diferent needs
> so gvcs sucks(anyway we all know that sucks,only usefull to start the
> movement)
> and anything similar will too
> every single place will also have a diferent economic situation...
> 2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>> Hi Kamala,
>> the bicycle lawn mower would fit into the low-tech:
>> I will send you email when we start the technology identification
>> process. Meanwhile you can gather more ideas.
>> Thanks,
>> Nikolay
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:18 AM, kamala108 freitag <kam...@live.co.uk>wrote:
>>> Hi people! Lets open source this one....Its a fantastic idea and so
>>> simple to build. No fuel costs and a great work out! The bicycle lawn mower.
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:28:13 +0200
>>> Subject: [OSE-Europe] Re: [open-e-land] Concrete Vision for the Open
>>> Source Economy in Europe
>>> From: vha...@gmail.com
>>> To: open-e-land@googlegroups.com
>>> CC: ose-europe@googlegroups.com; ose-germany@googlegroups.com;
>>> ose-italia@googlegroups.com
>>> Yeah, fine!
>>> I like that, put numbers and protocol for the technologies and for the
>>> social impact of open sourcing industrial manufacturing, and enterprises.
>>> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>>> Hi Ezequiel,
>>> we will put also numbers for the Open Source Economy similar to the
>>> Common Welfare Matrix.
>>> Before that I want to invite the people in identifying first the
>>> technologies needed for the Economy + The technological values we need in
>>> Europe (In Germany we already added Safety and Quality).
>>> I would make this decision making *open and participative* rather than
>>> do it with few people in Germany, because what we are doing is affecting
>>> Europe. It is a Vision to be owned and shared by everyone interested.
>>> Nikolay
>>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Ezequiel <vha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I have started to work in the Open Source Economy concept by applying
>>> the Common Welfare Economic Model started by this organisation
>>> http://www.gemeinwohl-oekonomie.org/en/
>>> I started with this work in my area and it's what i'd like for Open E
>>> Land. Basically it's a model that promotes widely the open source ideas but
>>> with rules.
>>> - Local Economies
>>> - Social Enterprise- Social responsability
>>> - Direct trade
>>> - No patents
>>> - etc
>>> I will help in this as long as i put into practice all the CWE.
>>> Best
>>> Ezequiel
>>> 2012/7/15 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>>> GVCS:
>>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
>>> Economy in Europe.*
>>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
>>> Economy
>>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>>> technology.
>>> - continuously updated and improved by community
I kind of get where Jose is coming from but also feel that some kind of vision can be valuable - I guess visions can be a bit blurry or incorrect but they give people something to gather around.
I think that there is enough similarity of needs within Europe and that there is much to be gained by co-operations between different countries. Open source heating systems are going to be a lot more interesting to people in the north of Europe but it still gets cold enough to need heating in most countries.
I'd like to see a mini tractor with front loader and back actor (hole digger). Very useful tool. Was discussing this today - we have a skid steer mini loader here which is excellent for moving and levelling stuff but we miss the mini 360 digger (the engine blew up and was sold) the loader is so much quicker for all tasks -just it can't dig holes or trenches :(
Also I've mentioned before - a diesel (multifuel) modular power cube system.
This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake to immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
* water - drinking water and for irrigation
* food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
* shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
* clothing - protection for the body
* warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a start.
Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should be provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed to make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways?
What level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is needed to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal?
These are very relevant questions, IMO.
Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies (see http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea is to express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically, product technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic networks <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network> (SN's). SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network, concepts (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees like the following:
Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for flaws, like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax. This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient.
It leads to blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is often glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the stepper motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village. Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor from scratch.
In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of the village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village isn't sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from?
Outside of the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it needs. By extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs, either.
Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the village. This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's ties from a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't eliminate the possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly complicates it. I do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate itself from our modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it. That being the case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village interfaces and integrates with the larger society.
Much of this discussion will come down to two things: money and law.
Neither can be ignored as they will have a direct impact on how the village operates, what level of technology, and on quality of life.
As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered here. I also believe that these questions can't be discussed, much less answered, in the abstract. Ideally, these questions should be discussed in the villages forming in Spain, Germany, Greece, etc. The discussion will be different based on local resources, local customs and tradition, local laws, and (perhaps most importantly) the people involved in the discussion.
This is a part of the OSE vision that I believe OSE-E will pioneer.
Marcin will (I believe) continue to treat this as an abstract exercise in problem solving. He is not a social person himself and (if possible) would rather remove people from the process. Historically speaking, I think that Europeans have a clearer understanding that people matter.
Society matters. Custom and tradition matters.
- Mark Norton
PS. Think of me as being from the New York part of Europe. :)
> * co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
> Economy
> * that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
> * flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of technology.
> * continuously updated and improved by community
+ my idea is to match the needs with economic sectors, every sector is a
need.
+ yes, we want identify the technologies and visualize the connections
between them (ecologies).
+ I believe it is clear for everyone that resources and products will be
imported into and exported from a village. You cannot avoid it. *Laws*:
That's why we want to create EU-Certified machines. The standards and laws
in Germany are especially high, but if we do it here, it is certification
and law replicable in Europe.
+ Although that Marcin had some bad relationships and neglected some issues
in the past, I believe he is forced to get better because OSE will not grow
otherwise. This is working and we proved it with OSE Europe for some
issues. I am happy that finally now there are more quality people around
him, that's always good.
It seems that we have to create this vision in a *time-distributed way *as
everyone is busy and free on different times. I will think how we can start
this process and make it open for improvements.
? Does anybody know people/website who has already tried identifying the
technologies for that? This could help us?
Nikolay
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Mark J. Norton
<markjnor...@earthlink.net>wrote:
> This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake to
> immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle
> lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at
> the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
> - water - drinking water and for irrigation
> - food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
> - shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
> - clothing - protection for the body
> - warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
> Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a start.
> Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should be
> provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost
> immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream
> (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a
> bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
> Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed to
> make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways? What
> level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is needed
> to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal? These are
> very relevant questions, IMO.
> Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies (see
> http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea is to
> express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically, product
> technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic networks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network>(SN's). SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network,
> concepts (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that
> represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a
> combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
> Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees like the
> following:
> Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire
> --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
> As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for flaws,
> like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
> Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
> The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
> FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
> Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local
> resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there
> are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax.
> This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient. It leads to
> blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second
> answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
> Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is often
> glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the stepper
> motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village.
> Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside
> of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At
> some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor
> from scratch.
> In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of the
> village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village isn't
> sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from? Outside of
> the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it needs. By
> extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs, either.
> Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the village.
> This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's ties from
> a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't eliminate the
> possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly complicates it. I
> do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate itself from our
> modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it. That being the
> case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village interfaces and
> integrates with the larger society. Much of this discussion will come down
> to two things: money and law. Neither can be ignored as they will have a
> direct impact on how the village operates, what level of technology, and on
> quality of life.
> As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered
> here. I also believe that these questions can't be discussed, much less
> answered, in the abstract. Ideally, these questions should be discussed in
> the villages forming in Spain, Germany, Greece, etc. The discussion will
> be different based on local resources, local customs and tradition, local
> laws, and (perhaps most importantly) the people involved in the
> discussion.
> This is a part of the OSE vision that I believe OSE-E will pioneer.
> Marcin will (I believe) continue to treat this as an abstract exercise in
> problem solving. He is not a social person himself and (if possible) would
> rather remove people from the process. Historically speaking, I think that
> Europeans have a clearer understanding that people matter. Society
> matters. Custom and tradition matters.
> - Mark Norton
> PS. Think of me as being from the New York part of Europe. :)
> On 7/15/2012 4:19 PM, Nikolay Georgiev wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
> GVCS:
> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
> Economy in Europe.*
> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
> Economy
> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of technology.
> - continuously updated and improved by community
> + my idea is to match the needs with economic sectors, every sector is a
> need.
> + yes, we want identify the technologies and visualize the connections
> between them (ecologies).
> + I believe it is clear for everyone that resources and products will be
> imported into and exported from a village. You cannot avoid it. *Laws*:
> That's why we want to create EU-Certified machines. The standards and laws
> in Germany are especially high, but if we do it here, it is certification
> and law replicable in Europe.
> + Although that Marcin had some bad relationships and neglected some
> issues in the past, I believe he is forced to get better because OSE will
> not grow otherwise. This is working and we proved it with OSE Europe for
> some issues. I am happy that finally now there are more quality people
> around him, that's always good.
> It seems that we have to create this vision in a *time-distributed way *as
> everyone is busy and free on different times. I will think how we can start
> this process and make it open for improvements.
> ? Does anybody know people/website who has already tried identifying the
> technologies for that? This could help us?
> Nikolay
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Mark J. Norton <markjnor...@earthlink.net
> > wrote:
>> This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake to
>> immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle
>> lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at
>> the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
>> - water - drinking water and for irrigation
>> - food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
>> - shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
>> - clothing - protection for the body
>> - warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
>> Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a start.
>> Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should be
>> provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost
>> immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream
>> (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a
>> bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
>> Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed to
>> make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways? What
>> level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is needed
>> to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal? These are
>> very relevant questions, IMO.
>> Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies
>> (see http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea is to
>> express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically, product
>> technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic networks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network>(SN's). SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network,
>> concepts (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that
>> represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a
>> combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
>> Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees like
>> the following:
>> Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire
>> --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
>> As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for flaws,
>> like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
>> Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
>> The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
>> FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
>> Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local
>> resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there
>> are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax.
>> This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient. It leads to
>> blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second
>> answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
>> Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is often
>> glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the stepper
>> motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village.
>> Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside
>> of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At
>> some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor
>> from scratch.
>> In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of the
>> village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village isn't
>> sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from? Outside of
>> the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it needs. By
>> extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs, either.
>> Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the
>> village. This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's
>> ties from a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't
>> eliminate the possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly
>> complicates it. I do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate
>> itself from our modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it.
>> That being the case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village
>> interfaces and integrates with the larger society. Much of this discussion
>> will come down to two things: money and law. Neither can be ignored as
>> they will have a direct impact on how the village operates, what level of
>> technology, and on quality of life.
>> As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered
>> here. I also believe that these questions can't be discussed, much less
>> answered, in the abstract. Ideally, these questions should be discussed in
>> the villages forming in Spain, Germany, Greece, etc. The discussion will
>> be different based on local resources, local customs and tradition, local
>> laws, and (perhaps most importantly) the people involved in the
>> discussion.
>> This is a part of the OSE vision that I believe OSE-E will pioneer.
>> Marcin will (I believe) continue to treat this as an abstract exercise in
>> problem solving. He is not a social person himself and (if possible) would
>> rather remove people from the process. Historically speaking, I think that
>> Europeans have a clearer understanding that people matter. Society
>> matters. Custom and tradition matters.
>> - Mark Norton
>> PS. Think of me as being from the New York part of Europe. :)
>> On 7/15/2012 4:19 PM, Nikolay Georgiev wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>> GVCS:
>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
>> Economy in Europe.*
>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
>> Economy
>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>> technology.
>> - continuously updated and improved by community
In my opinion, the most important thing is economic sustainability. One
should look at the problem from an economic point of view. In other words,
the open source movement should be able to make money.
The GVCS in my opinion tries to solve that sustainability problem by
creating a closed system, invulnerable to exterior factors.
If the standards of living were higher in this system even with 1930
technology, the system would be sustainable.
Right now, there is a shift toward creating a business that could provide
the Open Source Ecology money.
If OSE makes a good economic strategy that somehow protect itself from
market fluctuations, this could be a success.
Sustainability is the most important factor, something we might forget
since most people work in OSE for selfless reasons.
( I am mostly informed of the US OSE, so tell me if things have been
differrent in EU)
> 2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>> Hi Mark,
>> thank you for the good feedback.
>> + my idea is to match the needs with economic sectors, every sector is a
>> need.
>> + yes, we want identify the technologies and visualize the connections
>> between them (ecologies).
>> + I believe it is clear for everyone that resources and products will be
>> imported into and exported from a village. You cannot avoid it. *Laws*:
>> That's why we want to create EU-Certified machines. The standards and laws
>> in Germany are especially high, but if we do it here, it is certification
>> and law replicable in Europe.
>> + Although that Marcin had some bad relationships and neglected some
>> issues in the past, I believe he is forced to get better because OSE will
>> not grow otherwise. This is working and we proved it with OSE Europe for
>> some issues. I am happy that finally now there are more quality people
>> around him, that's always good.
>> It seems that we have to create this vision in a *time-distributed way *as
>> everyone is busy and free on different times. I will think how we can start
>> this process and make it open for improvements.
>> ? Does anybody know people/website who has already tried identifying the
>> technologies for that? This could help us?
>> Nikolay
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Mark J. Norton <
>> markjnor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake to
>>> immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle
>>> lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at
>>> the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
>>> - water - drinking water and for irrigation
>>> - food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
>>> - shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
>>> - clothing - protection for the body
>>> - warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
>>> Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a start.
>>> Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should be
>>> provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost
>>> immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream
>>> (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a
>>> bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
>>> Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed to
>>> make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways? What
>>> level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is needed
>>> to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal? These are
>>> very relevant questions, IMO.
>>> Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies
>>> (see http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea is
>>> to express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically, product
>>> technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic networks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network>(SN's). SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network,
>>> concepts (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that
>>> represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a
>>> combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
>>> Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees like
>>> the following:
>>> Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire
>>> --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
>>> As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for
>>> flaws, like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
>>> Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
>>> The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
>>> FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
>>> Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local
>>> resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there
>>> are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax.
>>> This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient. It leads to
>>> blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second
>>> answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
>>> Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is
>>> often glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the
>>> stepper motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village.
>>> Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside
>>> of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At
>>> some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor
>>> from scratch.
>>> In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of
>>> the village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village
>>> isn't sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from?
>>> Outside of the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it
>>> needs. By extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs,
>>> either.
>>> Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the
>>> village. This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's
>>> ties from a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't
>>> eliminate the possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly
>>> complicates it. I do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate
>>> itself from our modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it.
>>> That being the case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village
>>> interfaces and integrates with the larger society. Much of this discussion
>>> will come down to two things: money and law. Neither can be ignored as
>>> they will have a direct impact on how the village operates, what level of
>>> technology, and on quality of life.
>>> As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered
>>> here. I also believe that these questions can't be discussed, much less
>>> answered, in the abstract. Ideally, these questions should be discussed in
>>> the villages forming in Spain, Germany, Greece, etc. The discussion will
>>> be different based on local resources, local customs and tradition, local
>>> laws, and (perhaps most importantly) the people involved in the
>>> discussion.
>>> This is a part of the OSE vision that I believe OSE-E will pioneer.
>>> Marcin will (I believe) continue to treat this as an abstract exercise in
>>> problem solving. He is not a social person himself and (if possible) would
>>> rather remove people from the process. Historically speaking, I think that
>>> Europeans have a clearer understanding that people matter. Society
>>> matters. Custom and tradition matters.
>>> - Mark Norton
>>> PS. Think of me as being from the New York part of Europe. :)
>>> On 7/15/2012 4:19 PM, Nikolay Georgiev wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>>> GVCS:
>>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open Source
>>> Economy in Europe.*
>>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open Source
>>> Economy
>>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>>> technology.
>>> - continuously updated and improved by community
xekou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In my opinion, the most important thing is economic sustainability. One
> should look at the problem from an economic point of view. In other words,
> the open source movement should be able to make money.
> The GVCS in my opinion tries to solve that sustainability problem by
> creating a closed system, invulnerable to exterior factors.
> If the standards of living were higher in this system even with 1930
> technology, the system would be sustainable.
> Right now, there is a shift toward creating a business that could provide
> the Open Source Ecology money.
> If OSE makes a good economic strategy that somehow protect itself from
> market fluctuations, this could be a success.
> Sustainability is the most important factor, something we might forget
> since most people work in OSE for selfless reasons.
> ( I am mostly informed of the US OSE, so tell me if things have been
> differrent in EU)
>> yes im back in Spain
>> agree with norton 100 %
>> 2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>>> Hi Mark,
>>> thank you for the good feedback.
>>> + my idea is to match the needs with economic sectors, every sector is a
>>> need.
>>> + yes, we want identify the technologies and visualize the connections
>>> between them (ecologies).
>>> + I believe it is clear for everyone that resources and products will be
>>> imported into and exported from a village. You cannot avoid it. *Laws*:
>>> That's why we want to create EU-Certified machines. The standards and laws
>>> in Germany are especially high, but if we do it here, it is certification
>>> and law replicable in Europe.
>>> + Although that Marcin had some bad relationships and neglected some
>>> issues in the past, I believe he is forced to get better because OSE will
>>> not grow otherwise. This is working and we proved it with OSE Europe for
>>> some issues. I am happy that finally now there are more quality people
>>> around him, that's always good.
>>> It seems that we have to create this vision in a *time-distributed way *as
>>> everyone is busy and free on different times. I will think how we can start
>>> this process and make it open for improvements.
>>> ? Does anybody know people/website who has already tried identifying the
>>> technologies for that? This could help us?
>>> Nikolay
>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Mark J. Norton <
>>> markjnor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake to
>>>> immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle
>>>> lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at
>>>> the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
>>>> - water - drinking water and for irrigation
>>>> - food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
>>>> - shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
>>>> - clothing - protection for the body
>>>> - warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
>>>> Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a start.
>>>> Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should be
>>>> provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost
>>>> immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream
>>>> (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a
>>>> bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
>>>> Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed to
>>>> make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways? What
>>>> level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is needed
>>>> to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal? These are
>>>> very relevant questions, IMO.
>>>> Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies
>>>> (see http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea is
>>>> to express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically, product
>>>> technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic networks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network>(SN's). SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network,
>>>> concepts (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that
>>>> represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a
>>>> combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
>>>> Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees like
>>>> the following:
>>>> Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire
>>>> --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
>>>> As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for
>>>> flaws, like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
>>>> Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
>>>> The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
>>>> FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
>>>> Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local
>>>> resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there
>>>> are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax.
>>>> This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient. It leads to
>>>> blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second
>>>> answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
>>>> Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is
>>>> often glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the
>>>> stepper motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village.
>>>> Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside
>>>> of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At
>>>> some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor
>>>> from scratch.
>>>> In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of
>>>> the village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village
>>>> isn't sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from?
>>>> Outside of the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it
>>>> needs. By extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs,
>>>> either.
>>>> Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the
>>>> village. This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's
>>>> ties from a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't
>>>> eliminate the possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly
>>>> complicates it. I do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate
>>>> itself from our modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it.
>>>> That being the case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village
>>>> interfaces and integrates with the larger society. Much of this discussion
>>>> will come down to two things: money and law. Neither can be ignored as
>>>> they will have a direct impact on how the village operates, what level of
>>>> technology, and on quality of life.
>>>> As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered
>>>> here. I also believe that these questions can't be discussed, much less
>>>> answered, in the abstract. Ideally, these questions should be discussed in
>>>> the villages forming in Spain, Germany, Greece, etc. The discussion will
>>>> be different based on local resources, local customs and tradition, local
>>>> laws, and (perhaps most importantly) the people involved in the
>>>> discussion.
>>>> This is a part of the OSE vision that I believe OSE-E will pioneer.
>>>> Marcin will (I believe) continue to treat this as an abstract exercise in
>>>> problem solving. He is not a social person himself and (if possible) would
>>>> rather remove people from the process. Historically speaking, I think that
>>>> Europeans have a clearer understanding that people matter. Society
>>>> matters. Custom and tradition matters.
>>>> - Mark Norton
>>>> PS. Think of me as being from the New York part of Europe. :)
>>>> On 7/15/2012 4:19 PM, Nikolay Georgiev wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>>>> GVCS:
>>>> *A concrete technological vision for the development of the Open
>>>> Source Economy in Europe.*
>>>> That's why I think it is high time to create it.
>>>> - co-created by everyone who wants to participate in the Open
>>>> Source Economy
>>>> - that is easily transmitted and explained with a picture and words
>>>> - flows easily from the abstract to the concrete choice of
>>>> technology.
>>>> - continuously updated and improved by community
Ok , Nikolay, although the identification of the needed Technologies
requires to create a strategy based on only 2 factors, the vision of the
project and the sustainability of the project since the people that would
be affected by the technology will also need to sustain the project.
I advise against picking technologies that will help people and society in
general. Open sourcing the economy will help society and others eventually.
You cant have an abstract vision of the needed technologies.
But you can have a vision about the economy in general.
In that regard, Ezequeils post is a good starting point on the vision of
OSE and could be discussed in more detail here and I d be happy to take
part in it.
2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
> sustainability and money input is needed for everyone. That's clear. It is
> easier than with software actually.
> I want to keep this topic on the *Vision* and *Identification of the
> needed Technologies*.
> Thanks,
> Nikolay
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
> xekou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In my opinion, the most important thing is economic sustainability. One
>> should look at the problem from an economic point of view. In other words,
>> the open source movement should be able to make money.
>> The GVCS in my opinion tries to solve that sustainability problem by
>> creating a closed system, invulnerable to exterior factors.
>> If the standards of living were higher in this system even with 1930
>> technology, the system would be sustainable.
>> Right now, there is a shift toward creating a business that could provide
>> the Open Source Ecology money.
>> If OSE makes a good economic strategy that somehow protect itself from
>> market fluctuations, this could be a success.
>> Sustainability is the most important factor, something we might forget
>> since most people work in OSE for selfless reasons.
>> ( I am mostly informed of the US OSE, so tell me if things have been
>> differrent in EU)
>>> yes im back in Spain
>>> agree with norton 100 %
>>> 2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>> thank you for the good feedback.
>>>> + my idea is to match the needs with economic sectors, every sector is
>>>> a need.
>>>> + yes, we want identify the technologies and visualize the connections
>>>> between them (ecologies).
>>>> + I believe it is clear for everyone that resources and products will
>>>> be imported into and exported from a village. You cannot avoid it. *
>>>> Laws*: That's why we want to create EU-Certified machines. The
>>>> standards and laws in Germany are especially high, but if we do it here, it
>>>> is certification and law replicable in Europe.
>>>> + Although that Marcin had some bad relationships and neglected some
>>>> issues in the past, I believe he is forced to get better because OSE will
>>>> not grow otherwise. This is working and we proved it with OSE Europe for
>>>> some issues. I am happy that finally now there are more quality people
>>>> around him, that's always good.
>>>> It seems that we have to create this vision in a *time-distributed way
>>>> *as everyone is busy and free on different times. I will think how we
>>>> can start this process and make it open for improvements.
>>>> ? Does anybody know people/website who has already tried identifying
>>>> the technologies for that? This could help us?
>>>> Nikolay
>>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Mark J. Norton <
>>>> markjnor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>> This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake
>>>>> to immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle
>>>>> lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at
>>>>> the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
>>>>> - water - drinking water and for irrigation
>>>>> - food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
>>>>> - shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
>>>>> - clothing - protection for the body
>>>>> - warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
>>>>> Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a
>>>>> start. Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should
>>>>> be provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost
>>>>> immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream
>>>>> (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a
>>>>> bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
>>>>> Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed
>>>>> to make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways?
>>>>> What level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is
>>>>> needed to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal? These
>>>>> are very relevant questions, IMO.
>>>>> Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies
>>>>> (see http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea is
>>>>> to express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically, product
>>>>> technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic
>>>>> networks <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network> (SN's).
>>>>> SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network, concepts
>>>>> (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that
>>>>> represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a
>>>>> combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
>>>>> Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees like
>>>>> the following:
>>>>> Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire
>>>>> --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
>>>>> As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for
>>>>> flaws, like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
>>>>> Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
>>>>> The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
>>>>> FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
>>>>> Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local
>>>>> resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there
>>>>> are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax.
>>>>> This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient. It leads to
>>>>> blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second
>>>>> answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
>>>>> Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is
>>>>> often glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the
>>>>> stepper motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village.
>>>>> Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside
>>>>> of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At
>>>>> some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor
>>>>> from scratch.
>>>>> In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of
>>>>> the village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village
>>>>> isn't sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from?
>>>>> Outside of the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it
>>>>> needs. By extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs,
>>>>> either.
>>>>> Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the
>>>>> village. This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's
>>>>> ties from a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't
>>>>> eliminate the possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly
>>>>> complicates it. I do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate
>>>>> itself from our modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it.
>>>>> That being the case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village
>>>>> interfaces and integrates with the larger society. Much of this discussion
>>>>> will come down to two things: money and law. Neither can be ignored as
>>>>> they will have a direct impact on how the village operates, what level of
>>>>> technology, and on quality of life.
>>>>> As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered
>>>>> here. I also believe that these questions can't be discussed, much less
>>>>> answered, in the abstract. Ideally, these questions should be discussed in
>>>>> the villages forming in Spain, Germany, Greece, etc. The discussion will
>>>>> be different based on local resources, local customs and tradition, local
>>>>> laws, and (perhaps most importantly) the people involved in the
>>>>> discussion.
>>>>> This is a part of the OSE vision that I believe OSE-E will pioneer.
>>>>> Marcin will (I believe) continue to treat this as an abstract exercise in
>>>>> problem solving. He is not a social person himself and (if possible) would
>>>>> rather remove people from the process. Historically speaking, I think that
>>>>> Europeans have a clearer understanding that people matter. Society
>>>>> matters. Custom and tradition matters.
>>>>> - Mark Norton
>>>>> PS. Think of me as being from the New York part of Europe. :)
>>>>> On 7/15/2012 4:19 PM, Nikolay Georgiev wrote:
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>> what I am missing in my work in Germany is the European version of the
>>>>> GVCS:
the Vision itself does not say HOW it will be implemented (what you mean
with sustainability). This is a topic on its own.
And we already started picking up the technologies:
OSE Germany is developing VAWT, Oven and other technologies.
Italy is working on the Bricks machine.
What is missing an constantly evolving Vision of the OS Economy. If you are
communicating every day with people about OSE like me, you can understand
the power of a Vision transmitted by single picture and few words, and as a
next step showing on what technologies we are working. Open Standards and
Number on the technologies are more concrete than the Vision I am proposing
and should and will be developed too. I want to focus first on a better
unifying open community-developed and owned Vision. Something that I can *
see* and feel inspired to work on it. The GVCS is one part of it, but not
enough for Europe.
Nikolay
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
xekou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok , Nikolay, although the identification of the needed Technologies
> requires to create a strategy based on only 2 factors, the vision of the
> project and the sustainability of the project since the people that would
> be affected by the technology will also need to sustain the project.
> I advise against picking technologies that will help people and society in
> general. Open sourcing the economy will help society and others eventually.
> You cant have an abstract vision of the needed technologies.
> But you can have a vision about the economy in general.
> In that regard, Ezequeils post is a good starting point on the vision of
> OSE and could be discussed in more detail here and I d be happy to take
> part in it.
> 2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>> sustainability and money input is needed for everyone. That's clear. It
>> is easier than with software actually.
>> I want to keep this topic on the *Vision* and *Identification of the
>> needed Technologies*.
>> Thanks,
>> Nikolay
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
>> xekou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> In my opinion, the most important thing is economic sustainability. One
>>> should look at the problem from an economic point of view. In other words,
>>> the open source movement should be able to make money.
>>> The GVCS in my opinion tries to solve that sustainability problem by
>>> creating a closed system, invulnerable to exterior factors.
>>> If the standards of living were higher in this system even with 1930
>>> technology, the system would be sustainable.
>>> Right now, there is a shift toward creating a business that could
>>> provide the Open Source Ecology money.
>>> If OSE makes a good economic strategy that somehow protect itself from
>>> market fluctuations, this could be a success.
>>> Sustainability is the most important factor, something we might forget
>>> since most people work in OSE for selfless reasons.
>>> ( I am mostly informed of the US OSE, so tell me if things have been
>>> differrent in EU)
>>>> yes im back in Spain
>>>> agree with norton 100 %
>>>> 2012/7/16 Nikolay Georgiev <nikolay.h.georg...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>> thank you for the good feedback.
>>>>> + my idea is to match the needs with economic sectors, every sector is
>>>>> a need.
>>>>> + yes, we want identify the technologies and visualize the connections
>>>>> between them (ecologies).
>>>>> + I believe it is clear for everyone that resources and products will
>>>>> be imported into and exported from a village. You cannot avoid it. *
>>>>> Laws*: That's why we want to create EU-Certified machines. The
>>>>> standards and laws in Germany are especially high, but if we do it here, it
>>>>> is certification and law replicable in Europe.
>>>>> + Although that Marcin had some bad relationships and neglected some
>>>>> issues in the past, I believe he is forced to get better because OSE will
>>>>> not grow otherwise. This is working and we proved it with OSE Europe for
>>>>> some issues. I am happy that finally now there are more quality people
>>>>> around him, that's always good.
>>>>> It seems that we have to create this vision in a *time-distributed
>>>>> way *as everyone is busy and free on different times. I will think
>>>>> how we can start this process and make it open for improvements.
>>>>> ? Does anybody know people/website who has already tried identifying
>>>>> the technologies for that? This could help us?
>>>>> Nikolay
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Mark J. Norton <
>>>>> markjnor...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>> This is a useful exercise, Nikolay. However, think it's a mistake
>>>>>> to immediately jumping to a list of technologies or machines (bicycle
>>>>>> lawnmowers not withstanding). I believe that it might be best to look at
>>>>>> the core needs and work up from there. The core needs of any person are:
>>>>>> - water - drinking water and for irrigation
>>>>>> - food - for both immediate consumption and preserving
>>>>>> - shelter - from the rain, snow, wind, etc.
>>>>>> - clothing - protection for the body
>>>>>> - warmth - when it gets cold, heat is necessary
>>>>>> Likely, there are more than the above, but these can serve as a
>>>>>> start. Once the needs are established (more detail than the above should
>>>>>> be provided), you can start thinking about how to satisfy them. Almost
>>>>>> immediately, tools enter the picture. Water can be drunk from a stream
>>>>>> (assuming it is clean), but to carry water requires a tool of some kind: a
>>>>>> bottle, a bucket, even a dipper.
>>>>>> Tool making is where OSE enters the equation. What tools are needed
>>>>>> to make a comfortable life? Just what is a comfortable life, anyways?
>>>>>> What level of technology is appropriate or desired? How big a group is
>>>>>> needed to attain self-sufficiency? Is self-sufficiency even a goal? These
>>>>>> are very relevant questions, IMO.
>>>>>> Some of you may be familiar with the OSE concept of Product Ecologies
>>>>>> (see http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Product_ecology). The idea
>>>>>> is to express (graphically) how things are related. Philosophically,
>>>>>> product technologies are based on a more abstract idea called semantic
>>>>>> networks <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_network> (SN's).
>>>>>> SN's have been around for quite some time. In a semantic network, concepts
>>>>>> (things, etc.) are linked by lines (or arrows if directional) that
>>>>>> represent a relationship. For example, we can break down the parts of a
>>>>>> combine harvester and connect them using the "part-of" relationship.
>>>>>> Using this formalism, it's possible to express relationship trees
>>>>>> like the following:
>>>>>> Ax --used-to-make--> firewood --used-to-make--> fire
>>>>>> --used-to-make--> heat (satisfies a basic need)
>>>>>> As you start creating statements like this, you can examine it for
>>>>>> flaws, like, where does firewood come from? So we add:
>>>>>> Tree --used-to-make--> firewood
>>>>>> The jump from firewood to fire is also missing something, we can add:
>>>>>> FlintandSteel --used-to-make--> fire
>>>>>> Seemingly, we are close to filling a basic need, given some local
>>>>>> resources. Until we ask, where does the ax come from? To my mind, there
>>>>>> are two important answers to this question. The first is to make the ax.
>>>>>> This is a logical step given a desire to be self-sufficient. It leads to
>>>>>> blacksmithing tools and iron as a resource. There is, however, a second
>>>>>> answer that should be considered: "it comes from outside the village".
>>>>>> Based on my understanding of OSE to date, this is something that is
>>>>>> often glossed over. Consider the torch table, for example. Where do the
>>>>>> stepper motors come from? Answer: they come from outside of the village.
>>>>>> Marcin's view (which has merit) is that it's ok to use things "from outside
>>>>>> of the village" until we gain the ability to make it in the village. At
>>>>>> some point, we have the tools and resources needed to build a stepper motor
>>>>>> from scratch.
>>>>>> In my view, there will ALWAYS be something that comes from outside of
>>>>>> the village. If the stepper motor requires copper wire and the village
>>>>>> isn't sitting on top of copper ore, where does the copper come from?
>>>>>> Outside of the village. No village will ever have all of the resources it
>>>>>> needs. By extension, no village will ever have all of the tools it needs,
>>>>>> either.
>>>>>> Well, no matter, we'll just buy what we need from outside of the
>>>>>> village. This is the crux of the matter. An OSE village can't sever it's
>>>>>> ties from a regional, national, or global economy. While this doesn't
>>>>>> eliminate the possibility of an abundance based economy, it certainly
>>>>>> complicates it. I do not believe that any OSE-style village can isolate
>>>>>> itself from our modern society. Rather, it must come to terms with it.
>>>>>> That being the case, careful thought needs to go into how the OSE village
>>>>>> interfaces and integrates with the larger society. Much of this discussion
>>>>>> will come down to two things: money and law. Neither can be ignored as
>>>>>> they will have a direct impact on how the village operates, what level of
>>>>>> technology, and on quality of life.
>>>>>> As you can see, there are some pretty deep questions to be considered
