[esocialaction] Re: Let's roll

[Paula Graham]

rather than doing the project right here, is this viable as a theme?

Skype: bastubis
Jabber: bastubis at chicaslinux.net
ICQ: 57309531
MSN: bastubis at hotmail.com
Yahoo: pmgazz
Tel: +44 (0)20 7480 7332
Mobile: +44 (0)7759 710481

www.alt-synergy.co.uk <http://www.alt-synergy.co.uk>

Firefox Flicks! <http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=205>
Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org>


mp wrote:

>On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 12:55 +0000, Paula Graham wrote:
>  
>
>>To put it less abstractly: the culture and organisation of FLOSS
>>production is characterised by its originary material context - elite
>>intellectual institutions and sub-cultures of innovators with a great
>>deal of cultural capital, economically secure backgrounds, privileged
>>education, privileged access to power and resources.
>>    
>>
>
>While this is no doubt true in a lot of senses, it is noteworthy in this
>context that in fact it is in countries like Brazil that F/LOSS have a
>serious impact beyond the way in which, of course, F/LOSS underpin the
>Internet. And Brazil is a South, developing, poor whatever label is PC
>these days country. 
>
>  
>
>> Without damaging the "cred" it gets precisely from its cultural location which is
>>undoubtedly a factor in its impressive ability to penetrate the "silos"
>>of power, or the class/gender mode of bonding which is undoubtedly a
>>factor in its productive sustainability hitherto, FLOSS needs to adapt
>>its mode of cultural productivity (not necessarily its organisational
>>structure per se) if it is to be more widely implemented as a cultural
>>model. As it stands, it's culturally exclusionary, hierarchical,
>>clique-ish, and elitist as well as failing to grasp the implications of
>>real conditions globally in expanding beyond its existing base - not to
>>mince words ;-)
>>    
>>
>
>While this is probably also "true" in some sense, it appears to invest a
>kind of agency in a model - as if the software model was to change for
>others to be able to use it, but that makes no sense - since a model is
>just that: a model. So any one can use it.
>
>I think that you have to make a more appropriate distinction between
>what you call the model (which is probably the GPL in essence) and what
>you consider the culture that has grown around it.
>
>This is to say: do you mean that software production of the F/LOSS kind
>("the model") should be universally applicable to software production -
>or do you mean that the "the model" could be transposed to other domains
>of production as a universally applicable model for production and
>distribution? If it is the former then you are right about some, maybe
>most, of the *big and rich* free software sectors, but if it is the
>latter, then there is nothing to suggest that the culture of F/LOSS
>*should* change, for if the model is to be transposed to the production
>of sowing machines or tofu it does not directly matter how hackers
>behave or culturally engage in *their* community.
>
>This was just a quick response - maybe you can see what I am saying,
>maybe not. Basically, i think that your problem is set up too simply.
>
>For what concerns the transposure, the Oekonux project has been looking
>at this for quite some years already and can probably provide food for
>thought on the matter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>>  Given a clear diary day, I can articulate that in a
>>less adversarial tone!
>>
>>Hope that makes sense! That'd be my theme, anyway . . .
>>
>>Paula
>>
>>
>>Skype: bastubis
>>Jabber: bastubis at chicaslinux.net
>>ICQ: 57309531
>>MSN: bastubis at hotmail.com
>>Yahoo: pmgazz
>>Tel: +44 (0)20 7480 7332
>>Mobile: +44 (0)7759 710481
>>
>>www.alt-synergy.co.uk <http://www.alt-synergy.co.uk>
>>
>>Firefox Flicks! <http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=205>
>>Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org>
>>
>>
>>Yuwei Lin wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi All,
>>>
>>>First of all, many thanks for travelling to A'dam for this meeting. I
>>>was so happy to meet you all and discuss possible collaboration. I
>>>have a very good feeling for writing a NEST proposal, although I do
>>>think we need to identify our research objectives, methods and
>>>implications much better. Hopefully we'll be able to do this in the
>>>following weeks.
>>>
>>>Thanks for Soenke for sharing the insider information - it's indeed
>>>very useful.
>>>
>>>I've been thinking of integrating my interests in several themes
>>>including gender and FLOSS, learning in online communities and
>>>multidisciplinarity and cross-boundary work (a bit like what Soenke
>>>describe as p2p). As I reckon my main role in this project is to
>>>develop theoretical concepts and methodologies, I can see myself
>>>fitting into many emerging projects. That's also the reason why at the
>>>end of the meeting I was confused because I can't see myself only
>>>working on one single project.
>>>
>>>What I'll try to do now is to outline my interests and describe what
>>>project can be linked to these interests. I wish to do this before
>>>Wednesday. And see how this doc transpires.
>>>
>>>I'll be off to Taiwan for Christmas vacation on this Thursday, but
>>>I'll work remotely for this project and keep in touch with everyone
>>>via emails.
>>>
>>>Let's roll!
>>>
>>>Best wishes,
>>>yuwei
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>esocialaction mailing list
>>esocialaction at email-lists.org
>>https://www.email-lists.org/mailman/listinfo/esocialaction
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>  
>