7 Feb 2011 17:57
8 Feb 2011 15:18
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
[Converted from multipart/alternative] [1 text/plain] Hi, I wrote on this recently: http://www.libertyandsolidarity.org/node/104 I think the link is found in the changed political economy of information. Alistair On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Stefan Merten <smerten@...> wrote: > Hi list! > > I wonder whether it is possible to draw a connection between WikiLeaks > and peer production as we understand it here. > > At first glance there seems to be hardly a connection. But may be some > of you have other ideas? > > > Grüße > > Stefan > [2 text/html](Continue reading)
8 Feb 2011 21:38
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
On 2011-02-07 17:57, Stefan Merten wrote: > I wonder whether it is possible to draw a connection between > WikiLeaks and peer production as we understand it here. > > At first glance there seems to be hardly a connection. But may be > some of you have other ideas? In my view *Leaks _is_ peer-production: They produce transparency of governmental or private secrets, they act in peer mode, they are fed by contributions and not by exchange, selbstentfaltung (self-directed passion) is the individual driver. One might say that *Leaks is only operating in reaction to the old system, however, from a more general point of view *Leaks is offering an information distribution infrastructure which may play a role in a free society too. Ciao, Stefan -- -- Start here: www.meretz.de _________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt@...
8 Feb 2011 21:56
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
[Converted from multipart/alternative] [1 text/plain] I have not read the previously referred to article yet, so just reacting to what StefanMz is saying below: from what I know WL started out with the idea that anyone could contribute (i.e. evaluate the leaks) but they found that unworkable and previous to the vetting deal with the NYT, Guardian etc they had some inhouse "experts" who evaluated. In other words their inner functions are 100% opaque (they have their reasons I guess), including their financial dealings - for example the guy from Cryptome (Young?) who is a uber-vociferous critic of WL, raised the question of the deal with the newspapers: does it cover expenses, legal fees etc? No-one knows. So while they may be producing transparency externally the same cannot be said for their inner operations. cheers, Mathieu ----- Original Message ----- From: Stefan Meretz <stefan@...> Date: Tuesday, February 8, 2011 9:39 pm Subject: Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production? To: list-en@... > On 2011-02-07 17:57, Stefan Merten wrote: > > I wonder whether it is possible to draw a connection between > > WikiLeaks and peer production as we understand it here. > > > > At first glance there seems to be hardly a connection. But may be > > some of you have other ideas? > > In my view *Leaks _is_ peer-production: They produce > transparency of > governmental or private secrets, they act in peer mode, they are(Continue reading)
8 Feb 2011 22:48
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
On 2011-02-08 21:56, Mathieu ONeil wrote: > (...) raised the question of the deal > with the newspapers: does it cover expenses, legal fees etc? No-one > knows. So while they may be producing transparency externally the > same cannot be said for their inner operations. Concerning WikiLeaks that's true and commonly criticized. We will see if OpenLeaks will do better. Is every free software project transparent in this regard (serious question, I don't know)? Does this change the character of being peer-production? Ciao, Stefan -- -- Start here: www.meretz.de _________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt@...
9 Feb 2011 00:19
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
[Converted from multipart/alternative] [1 text/plain] > Does this change the character of being peer-production? Apart from the money/governance angle it is not clear to me how they actually operate - how democratically or openly decisions are taken, apart from the fact that the reason openleaks forked off was because "Schmitt" contested the autocracry of the WL founder - see the Wired-leaked IRC chat logs etc. cheers, Mathieu ----- Original Message ----- From: Stefan Meretz <stefan@...> Date: Tuesday, February 8, 2011 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production? To: list-en@... > On 2011-02-08 21:56, Mathieu ONeil wrote: > > (...) raised the question of the deal > > with the newspapers: does it cover expenses, legal fees etc? > No-one > > knows. So while they may be producing transparency externally the > > same cannot be said for their inner operations. > > Concerning WikiLeaks that's true and commonly criticized. We > will see if > OpenLeaks will do better. Is every free software project > transparent in > this regard (serious question, I don't know)? >(Continue reading)
9 Feb 2011 03:24
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
[Converted from multipart/alternative] [1 text/plain] Is this essential, though? Linux lacks formal democracy, but remains democratic in character due to the political economy - the communal nature of the output (eg the ability to fork and patch prevents non-consensual rule). And as we all know formal democracy can disguise tyranny. The emergence of other leaks sites suggests that in the medium-term, something similar will be true of these, and the ability of members to leave the organisation at will suggests that those who remain must be okay with what's going on. A project manager or editor is not a dictator. The one real harm WikiLeaks could do to the working class is refuse to publish a beneficial leak. I don't think they are likely to do so, but the emergence of a few more sites should hedge against that becoming a problem. On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:19 PM, Mathieu ONeil <mathieu.oneil@...>wrote: > [Converted from multipart/alternative] > > [1 text/plain] > > Does this change the character of being peer-production? > > Apart from the money/governance angle it is not clear to me how they > actually operate - how democratically or openly decisions are taken, apart > from the fact that the reason openleaks forked off was because "Schmitt" > contested the autocracry of the WL founder - see the Wired-leaked IRC chat > logs etc. > cheers, > Mathieu(Continue reading)
10 Feb 2011 22:54
[ox-en] Fwd: [Commoning] OKCon 2011: Call for Participation
Betreff: [Commoning] OKCon 2011: Call for Participation Datum: 2011-02-10, 16:20:42 Von: Daniel Dietrich <daniel.dietrich@...> An: Commoning List <commoning@...> Dear all, the following is a Call for Participation for the Open Knowledge Conference (OKCon) 2011. • where: Kalkscheune Berlin, Germany • when: 30th June & 1st July, 2011 • call for participation: http://okcon.org/2011/cfp/ • submission: please see submission details below • registration: http://okcon2011.eventbrite.com/ • hashtag: #okcon2011 We are looking fwd for your participation! Would be great to meet you at OKCon 2011 in Berlin. Please get in touch with us at okcon@... if you want to participate, have any questions or suggestions. Best regards Daniel (PS: Sorry for cross-posting) -- Daniel Dietrich(Continue reading)
14 Feb 2011 09:28
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
This is very interesting and seems to be more general. Often the leaders and in-groups of the free culture movement (thanks Alistair for the wikileaks/marx essay! I just translated it into Finnish) are less than transparent and less than ideally democratic (one thinks of Stallman, Wales, Assange, even Torvalds to an extent; can you name Linus' lieutenants?). This is, up to a point, sad for the individuals concerned, especially when compounded by fame & potentially fortune. However, as Alistair points out, on the level of the community or the movement the poison is diluted if not completely removed by the possibility of forking. (In some cases the personalities and in-groups do have considerable pull and forking is not a realistic option.) Scott Lash has described (in the Critique of Information and other places) how the disorganisational nature of hacker communities nurtures or even necessitates charismatic leadership. Organisational, institutional leadership would be too rigid and without a foundation; therefore charismatic leadership is all there is. Maybe we have here another fortunate side-effect of post-scarcity: like free-riders, narcissistic leaders are not anymore a problem. They may even be an asset, because they get people involved. On 2/9/11 4:24 AM, Alistair Davidson wrote: > [Converted from multipart/alternative] > > [1 text/plain] > Is this essential, though? Linux lacks formal democracy, but remains > democratic in character due to the political economy - the communal nature > of the output (eg the ability to fork and patch prevents non-consensual > rule). And as we all know formal democracy can disguise tyranny. The > emergence of other leaks sites suggests that in the medium-term, something(Continue reading)
14 Feb 2011 15:51
Re: [ox-en] WikiLeaks and peer production?
[Converted from multipart/alternative] [1 text/plain] On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Tere Vadén <tere.vaden@...> wrote: > Scott Lash has described (in the Critique of Information and other places) > how the disorganisational nature of hacker communities nurtures or even > necessitates charismatic leadership. Organisational, institutional > leadership would be too rigid and without a foundation; therefore > charismatic leadership is all there is. Maybe we have here another fortunate > side-effect of post-scarcity: like free-riders, narcissistic leaders are not > anymore a problem. They may even be an asset, because they get people > involved. Hmm, this sounds rather like the situation under primitive communism! [2 text/html] _________________________________ Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/ Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/ Contact: projekt@...
RSS Feed