Re: [rumori]

From: Steev Hise (
Date: Sun Dec 31 2000 - 13:00:32 PST

Sun, 31 Dec 2000 found Jim Carrico writing:

>yes - i don't know about the village story, but destruction of wealth did
>happen. but the whole economy and society was also in the process of
>getting warped out of shape by their encounter with the commodity and
>mass-produced goods.

so those extreme cases only happened after contact with
europeans? interesting.

>exactly! an ideal potlatch network would consist of people contributing
>something other than money - but I think there has to be some measure of
>valuing some contributions over others - some way of knowing, and
>rewarding, what people actually want. And a way to contribute "just money"
>if that's all you have.

yes. the measuring is a problem, isn't it? worth thinking
about carefully...

>this is at least partially a design flaw in gnutella - I've haven't seen a

gnutella is a protocol. you're actually talking about a flaw
in a single gnutella client. there are dozens, all writen by
different programmers. but the point is taken, the interface
will definitely influence behavior.

>the point of freenet and mojonation is encourage users
>to make the *system resources* available

what do you mean, system resources?

>And while i'm at it let me rant about the phrase "tragedy of the commons" -
>i england, where I believe the phrase originates, there wasn't a friggin
>tragedy of the commons until most of it got fenced in in the original
>"enclosures" - nowadays we call it privitization - the remaining common
>land became overcrowded. In other words it was a manufactured scarcity...

so are you saying the concept of the tragedy of the commons
is false because if we had more commons there wouldn't be
the tragedy? how much commons for a given population size
is required to avoid tragedy, in your view?

Perhaps what you're getting at is that private property
corrupts common property? If there were no private
ownership, if all the world were a commons,
people would all be equal stewards of the land (and other
resources). I would agree with that. sigh.

>>More on "worth doing" - if "worth doing" means "enough to
>>make a living", then the art of almost NO artist is "worth
>>doing". But there are other motivations, luckily...
>well, i see it as the difference between 'making a living' and 'having a
>life' - i only ever really wanted the latter. And anyway we obviously
>can't survive in this society without money, so every little bit helps...

Yes, well, what I was getting at is, how do we teach this to
the people (artists) that think they deserve to be supported
for their lifestyle choice ("an artist"), or as they would
put it their "vision", or "genius"? How do we say, if we
believe, that perhaps we should all "drive cabs" a bit, AND
make art a bit?


Steev Hise, Nervert
"I have no tolerance for fools."

Rumori, the Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
Rumori list archives & other information are at

Home | Detrivores | Rhizome | Archive | Projects | Contact | Help | Text Index

[an error occurred while processing this directive] N© Sharerights extended to all.