Keith, enlightened self interest will take over. And some form of governance will take place. The banks will want it as will the charge card companies. The alternative to some form of oversight is to go to a two tier (or more) internet. With varying amounts of security. Sort of like the old penny postcard, it was cheap but it was open and had no privacy or security. First class mail carried with it security and privacy and tampering with the mails was a serious offence.
Hard to imagine a global internet economy with no rules of the road, with no enforcement, with no sanctions. arthur From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Weick Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 2:05 PM To: Keith Hudson; RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the... Keith, you can never expect intstitutions established to work out issues that are complex and have international as well as domestic implications. The best you can hope for is that people come together to try to set rules and resolve problems whether they succeed in doing so or not. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Hudson <mailto:[email protected]> To: Ed Weick <mailto:[email protected]> ; RE-DESIGNING WORK,INCOME DISTRIBUTION, <mailto:[email protected]> EDUCATION Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the... Ed, Neither the WTO or the IMF are working very well. The Doha round hasn't been resumed and the IMF has nowhere near enough funds. WTO disputes are relatively small beer -- useful for governments to shelve their own decision-making. The Doha round couldn't cope with the really important issue (food). Most world trade is within multinational corporations anyway. Most other deals involving reduced tariffs are bilateral. As for the IMF, it can only receive its funds from the very countries which now have the most need for it! Neither the WTO or the IMF has any sort of assured future. I wouldn't bet on either of them. I'm not saying that the Internet couldn't do with some sort of Supreme Court of International Law jurisdiction. This would be useful in an ideal world but as this hasn't yet developed within the field of human rights or genocide (to which Internet problems are more closely associated), except fitfully and partially, then I don't see how it could evolve given the still fierce jingoism of nation-state politicians. There was an immense effort by nation-states about 10 years ago to control the Internet. But they failed because they couldn't cope with encryption. The Internet is now far too complex for anybody to control and the only way for good practice to develop is via the usual method of the growth of common law across common cultures. Like international trade, aid and justice, the Internet is a long way from this yet. Keith At 07:15 07/02/2010 -0500, you wrote: Though they don't always work as originally intended or in everybody's interest, the WTO or the IMF provide models. You don't have to own, you have to agree and be able to work out problems as they arise. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Hudson <mailto:[email protected]> To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, <mailto:[email protected]> INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION ; Arthur <mailto:[email protected]> Cordell Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 5:39 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the... Arthur, But how do you take over something that nobody owns? Keith At 20:42 06/02/2010 -0500, you wrote: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01CAA76C.E7F26710" Content-Language: en-us Not about safe for children, but safe to do traverse, transact and explore. See abstract below to a forthcoming paper. ----------------------------- Every economy requires a physical, institutional and legal infrastructure, as well as understandable and enforceable marketplace rules, in order to function smoothly. The building of such an infrastructure, which provides trust and confidence for all those who operate in or are affected by it, is a necessary condition for the development and efficient functioning of a global, digital economy. While the Internet is often said to be different; in one important respect it is like all previous infrastructures: a system of governance, oversight and sanctions are needed if the Internet is to live up to its full potential. The presentation also indicates one possible enormous cost which could result if the global Internet economy has to deal with growing distrust: A move away from open online networks to closed networks or back to some amalgam of the bricks and mortar world. The Internet is an open network where there is no outside body that can administer sanctions. It appears to be unique in commercial history. One characteristic of the public Internet is that, since it consists of many thousands of autonomous networks spanning a large number of jurisdictions, it has no well defined they. There is no global oversight body (a they) that can intervene when wrongdoing occurs. Drawing upon the lessons of history and historical analogies, the presentation outlines the uniqueness and fragility of our current situation and emphasizes the need for international action to provide remedies. For the Internet to achieve its maximum social and political potential, there will have to be agreed upon and effective rules of the road. There is a need for effective governance, both nationally and globally. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 2:24 PM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the... As well of course, there are those who rather dislike the somewhat anarchistic nature of online discourse and who (in the currently fashionable jargon) look to create a "moral panic" sufficient to justify making the net safe for "the children" or to control "piracy on the electronic high seas"... through various kinds of over-reaching draconian moves (think airport security... MBG -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 12:02 AM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the... With increasing distrust on the net (arising from concern with identity theft, cybercrime, etc.etc.) we will see increasing amounts of energy and labour devoted trying to make the net a safe place to do business. This is one of the costs of distrust. arthur From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 4:17 AM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist: one in four Americansis employed to guard the... -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Carson Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 3:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist: one in four Americansis employed to guard the... Sent to you by Kevin Carson via Google Reader: Santa <http://feeds.boingboing.net/~r/boingboing/iBag/~3/UTD9Jx3Y874/santa-fe-inst itute-e.html> Fe Institute economist: one in four Americans is employed to guard the wealth of the rich via Boing Boing <http://www.boingboing.net/> by Cory Doctorow on 2/5/10 Here's a fascinating profile on radical Santa Fe Institute economist Samuel Bowles, an empiricist who says his research doesn't support the Chicago School efficient marketplace hypothesis. Instead, Bowles argues that the wealth inequality created by strict market economics creates inefficiencies because society has to devote so much effort to stopping the poor from expropriating the rich. He calls this "guard labor" and says that one in four Americans is employed to in the sector -- labor that could otherwise be used to increase the nation's wealth and progress. 226edc7.jpg The greater the inequalities in a society, the more guard labor it requires, Bowles finds. This holds true among US states, with relatively unequal states like New Mexico employing a greater share of guard labor than relatively egalitarian states like Wisconsin. The problem, Bowles argues, is that too much guard labor sustains "illegitimate inequalities," creating a drag on the economy. All of the people in guard labor jobs could be doing something more productive with their time--perhaps starting their own businesses or helping to reduce the US trade deficit with China. Guard labor supports what one might call the beat-down economy. Community Action's Porter sees it all the time. "We have based almost everything we have done on the idea that we always need a part of our workforce that is marginalized--that we can call this group into action at any time, pay them nothing and they will do anything that needs to be done," she says. More discouraging, perhaps, is the statistical fact that a person born into this workforce has little chance of rising beyond it. Born Poor? <http://sfreporter.com/stories/born_poor/5339/all/> (via MeFi <http://metafilter.com> ) Previously: * China's <http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/02/chinas-labor-unrest.html#previouspost> labor unrest worse than suspected - Boing Boing * Which <http://www.boingboing.net/2009/03/13/which-side-are-you-o.html#previouspost > Side Are You On? Explaining what happened to labor in ... * Questions <http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/07/questions-from-econo.html#previouspost > from economics honors exam at Oberlin College Boing Boing * EVE <http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/02/eve-onlines-economis.html#previouspost > Online's economist speaks -- economics as an experimental ... * Max <http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/09/max-keisers-curmudge.html#previouspost > Keiser's curmudgeonly TV economics show: the Oracle - Boing Boing * Mackerel <http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/03/mackerel-economics-i.html#previouspost > economics in prison - Boing Boing * Economics <http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/07/economics-of-malware.html#previouspost > of Malware - Boing Boing * MP3s <http://www.boingboing.net/2006/03/31/mp3s-from-economics-.html#previouspost > from "Economics of Open Content" conference - Boing Boing * Boing <http://www.boingboing.net/2007/07/20/psychology_design_an.html#previouspost > Boing: Psychology, design and economics of slot-machines <http://ads.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=2bbbfb2f471bdfa1382c7f0a2b2770fc&p=1> 226ee54.jpg226eeb2.jpg226ef00.jpg Things you can do from here: * Subscribe <http://www.google.com/reader/view/feed%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.boingboing.net% 2Fboingboing%2FiBag?source=email> to Boing Boing using Google Reader * Get started using Google <http://www.google.com/reader/?source=email> Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework Keith Hudson, Saltford, England _____ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
<<image001.jpg>>
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
