VirtualMoney

VirtualMoneyDiscussionMoneyMoney
Some WordsXanaduVersion
see also DiscussionMultilingue


[en]References found in this page around the idea of Exchange Systems
[fr]Références trouvées dans cette page autour de l’idée de Systèmes d’Echanges
[it]Riferimenti trovati in questa pagina a proposito dell’idea di Sistemi di scambio

Théorie

  • LargeOrganizationsDilemma
  • AIRBAG
    (Note by luigi: AI"R"BAG was an attempt to find a language …. that might be used to tell “offline” people why and how they should start going “online” … in this respect AI"R"BAG can be a “trial and error” experience because … there is no language for such task … and … there is no gateway (or middleground interface) between the “technically minded” and the “non technically minded” people who should be involved …
    i wonder if one might say … that AI"R"BAG aims to be an interface between theory and experience … because what “OnlineCommunity” people experience cannot be reported to “CommunityOnline” people as an experience … to their ears it will sound like theory … they are invited to buy …
    therefore … as of now … AI"R"BAG is a Théorie / Teoria / Theory … waiting to be transformed into an expérience / esperienza / experience )
  • Marx (text in french)
  • WikiDe:ETerra
  • The Transitioner

Expérience


the question reads as follows:
[en]What would money be like, if humans, when inventing it, would already have known wiki?
[de] wie würde das geld aussehen, wenn die menschen bei seiner erfindung schon das wiki gekannt hätten?
[fr]Que pourrait être la monnaie si les humains, lorsque ils l’ont inventé, connaisssaient déjà les wiki ?
[it]Cosa sarebbe il denaro se gli umani, quando l’hanno inventato, avessero già saputo cosa sono i wiki ?

[en]immaterial reality :
On a wiki one participates in a shared enrichment, to give something to somebody doesn’t produce an impoverishment of the giver but that leads the enrichment of the community and so enrichment of each one individually.
[de]Immaterielle Wirklichkeit
Auf einem wiki beteiligt man sich an einer geteilte Bereicherung, jemand irgendwas geben verarmt den Geber nicht aber es fuehrt zu einer Bereicherung der Gemeinschaft, und daher des einzelnen.
[fr]réalité immmatérielle :
Sur un wiki on participe à un enrichissement partagé, donner quelque chose ne produit pas un appauvrissement de celui qui donne mais cela entraine un enrichissement de la communauté et donc de chacun individuellement.
[it]realtà immateriale :
In un wiki si partecipa a un arricchimento condiviso; dare qualcosa a qualcuno non significa un impoverimento di chi da; produce invece un un arricchimento della comunità e quindi di ciascuno (membro della comunità), individualmente.
--sylvie

[en] Did humans invent Money? I thought money happened as the solution to the problem of a barter economy where the needs of the producer could not be met by the products of the consumer. Wiki is about sharing knowledge. This has rarely involved money directly. You pay for a book, sure - but the author gets very little, usually.
[de] Haben Menschen Geld erfunden? Ich dachte Geld geschah als Loesung des Problems das die Berdurfnisse des Herstellers nicht durch die Herstellungen des Konsumenten abgedeckt wuerde. Wiki ist Wissensumtausch. Das hatte noch nie direkt was mit Geld zu tun. Man bezahlt einen Buch, sicher - aber der Autor kriegt nur wenig davon.
[fr]Les humains ont-ils inventé la monnaie ? Je pense que la monnaie est arrivé comme solution au problème d’une économie basée sur le troc dés lors que les besoins du producteur ne furent plus satisfaits par les produits du consommateur. Les Wiki proposent de partager de la connaissance. Cela implique rarement des rapports d’argent directs . Vous payez un livre, biensûr - mais l’auteur obtient très peu, habituellement.
[it]Ma il denaro è stato inventato dagli umani ? Credevo che fosse stato introdotto come soluzione al problema di un economia degli scambi, per il caso in cui i bisogni del produttore non vengono soddisfatti dai prodotti del consumatore. I wiki riguardano la condivisione della conoscenza. In questo caso il denaro è di rado direttamente coinvolto. Paghi per un libro, è vero, ma l’autore di solito ne ricava molto poco.

[en]problem : ABCA
A needs B who doesn’t need A but B needs C who needs A
reverse the problem :ACBA
A gives to C that which it needs, C gives to B that which it needs, B gives to A what which it needs.
[de]problem : ABCA
A braucht B, der A nicht braucht, aber B braucht C, der wiederum A braucht.
drehen wir das problem um :ACBA
A gibt C das was er braucht, C gibt B das was er braucht und B gibt wiederum A das was er braucht.
[fr]problème : ABCA
A à besoin de B qui n’a pas besoin de A mais B à besoin de C qui lui à besoin de A
inversons le problème : ACBA
A donne à C ce dont il a besoin, C donne à B ce dont il a besoin, B donne à A ce dont il a besoin.
[it] problema : ABCA
A ha bisogno di B che non ha bisogno di A ma B ha bisogno di C che ha bisogno di A
invertiamo il problema : ACBA
A da a C ciò di cui ha bisogno, C da a B ciò di cui ha bisogno, B da a A ciò di cui ha bisogno
--sylvie

[en]sigi writes something here in German and required aonghus to translate it into English. aonghus did not require sigi, but he required sylvie to translate it into French, who can only translate when sigi has written before :-)
i find the idea with mutual enriching exemplary also for our commerce with money. money, which is owned by the individual, must at the same time be community property. you may tell me what i should do with my money.
[de]sigi schreibt hier etwas auf deutsch und benötigt aonghus, um es ins englische zu übersetzen. aunghus benötigt sigi nicht, aber er benötigt, um es ins französiche zu übersetzen, sylvie, die es wiederum nur dann übersetzen kann, wenn sigi es vorher geschrieben hat :-)
ich finde die idee mit der gegenseitigen bereicherung vorbildhaft auch für unseren umgang mit geld. das geld, was dem einzelnen gehört, muss gleichzeitig gemeinschafts eigentum sein. ihr dürft mitbestimmen, was ich mit meinem geld machen soll.
[fr]…I ‘m not able to translate this part it doesn’t make sense for me I’ m lost :-)
[it]sigi scrive qualcosa in tedesco qui e chiede ad aonghus di tradurlo in Inglese. aonghus non ha bisogno di sigi, ma ha chiesto a sylvie di tradurre in Francese, che …?? [en] the italian here dosn’t sound right … to be completed ….
[it] ….. traduzione da finire..
sigi

[en] i may need an alternative point of view … where the assumption is …
We are coming from an ABC reality where B is not perceived, yet, by many people
We have several instances of As (ie: we live in a multicultural world)
Some of our As make and sell Cs
Some other As buy and use Cs
There are now suggestions that we should move into a reality where B is perceived
Because some As are facing a dilemma (see Lion’s LargeOrganizationsDilemma)
or
Because some As (ie: ourselves), who may already perceive B, do not manage to communicate what B stands for
I (believe I) belong to the latter group
Whatever I have tried to say/propose - even using Power Point presentations - for many years
to try and introduce B as a virtual value … has always failed to make other people feel actioned
Even if I pin them down with a question like:
Why the Web was invented by an “A” whose business was not making/selling “C"s ??

[fr]j’aurai besoin d’un point de vue alternatif… dans l’hypothèse où…
Nous venons d’ une réalité ABC dans laquelle B n’est pas perçu, encore, par beaucoup de gens.
Nous avons de nombreux exemples (I.E : nous vivons dans un monde multiculturel) tels que :
Certains “A” font et vendent des “C”
D’autres “A” achètent et utilisent des “C”
Il y a à présent des suggestions que nous devrions déplacer dans une réalité dans laquelle “B” soit perceptible,
car certains “A” sont face à un dilemne (voir la contribution de Lion à propos du Dilemne des Grandes Organisations )
ou
certains “A” (comme nous-mêmes), qui peuvent déjà percevoir B, mais ne parviennent pas à communiquer ce que B représente
J’ appartiennent (je crois) à ce dernier groupe
Quoique j’ai pu essayer de dire/proposer - même en utilisant des présentations “power point” - pendant de longues années
pour essayer d’introduire B comme valeur virtuelle… Il a toujours manqué que d’autres personnes se sentent concernées
même si je les obligeais à répondre à la question :
Pourquoi le Web a été inventé par un “A” dont l’activité n’était ni de faire des “C” ni d’en acheter ? … ( traduction à continuer)…

[en]I always end up in getting comments like:
Where is the beef?? or So what??
You are making a house’s roof before its basement
You see things with different spectacles than mine

in my last power point “wacky” communication attempt (a few years ago)
i tried to picture A , B and C using those days latest buzzwords
i.e.: Customer and/or Partnership Relationship Management
it could now be reviewed to insert Wikis and Weblogs instead
and to see if a multihanded approach can rescue anything of my singlehanded attempt to communicate
… an ABC reality possible development strategy …

I would call this revision an Error Recovery procedure
anybody cares to take a look ???

*surely we do. this is a wiki! --sigi

[en]Individuals do not own money. The money we have represents (usually) work done. (Of course, this is an oversimplification - I have left out Inheritance)
[de]Geld gehoert nicht Einzelpersonen. Das Geld das wir haben stellt (normalerweise) geleistete Arbeit da. (Ja, dies ist eine Vereinfachung - Erben hab ich aussen vor gelassen)
[fr]Les individus ne possèdent pas l’argent. L’argent que nous avons représente (habituellement) le travail effectué. (naturellement, c’est une simplification exagérée - j’avais oublié la discussion)

[en] Money is just a token for exchange.
[de] Geld ist nur einen Tauschmittel.
[fr]La monnaie est seulement un moyen d’échange

[en] There are many parts of life where money plays no role, or a secondary role.
[de] Es gibt einiges in Leben wo Geld keine oder nuer eine untergeordnete Rolle spielt.
[fr]Il y a de nombreux endroits de notre vie dans lesquels la monnaie ne joue aucun rôle, ou bien un rôle trés secondaire.

[en] I don’t think anybody is on Wiki to earn or spend money! We are here to share opinions and knowledge.
[de] I glaube nicht das irgendwer auf Wiki kommt um Geld zu verdienen oder auszugeben. Wir sind zum Meinungs- und Wissens austausch hier.
[fr]Je pense qu’il n’y a personne qui soit sur un wiki pour y gagner ou y dépenser de l’argent ! Nous sommmes là pour échanger des opinions et des connaissances.

About money: money is a social invention that works to ease cooperation within the framework of a stable society. Without society or without stability it looses its value. Economy tends to forget that money is a social thing. The problems of money can’t be cured by removing it, because this would remove the advantages of this invention. The problems of money must be cured by re-strengthening the social context and consensus on which it is built. This also means: money is already something virtual. And: if you want to create a new kind of money, you must create a new and stable community (society) that has a stronger social context. – HelmutLeitner

[en] Before translating (Helmut, Aonghus and sigi)‘s comments … further comments about VirtualMoney might be prompted by progress in sylvie's page tentative discussion
[de] ….
[fr] …
[it] ..

You left out banking systems, Aonghus. I do know nothing about it, but what I know: current money systems are completly and irreversably corrupt. JeckylIslandConference?, stuff like that. They have to be reconstructed from sratch. That’s what we need a new currency for.

[en] Yes I know; Banking systems are a problem. So is the stock exchange. So is private ownership of land, if it is used for speculation. But a new currency will not change any of these problems. The problem is that these systems all mean that the people making decisions are not the people affected by the decisions. The stock exchange started as a way of sharing risk between a few poeple who knew each other, and the company the risk was in. Now, the investors don’t even know, usually, where the money is going. And there are many levels of decision takers between the people who have the capital, and the people who need the capital, and the employees of the companies which need the capital. But it is hard to see how a wiki would solve these problems, which was sigis original question.
[en] Perhaps you or sigi could outline your proposed solution, (or point us at a source) and then we might not be talking at cross purposes.

[en]Maybe we dont need to find a solution for humanity problems, which have been evolving from long estabilished practices and standards (communication - behaviour - … whatever) and have grown to a complexity far beyond anybody’s reach ….

[en] maybe showing how wikis can be used to start changing those practices and standards … would be a great step forward … we can afford taking … i wonder

[en]What I understand about what Aonghus says that is currency is a system and a system is not good or bad but the stakes are in the ways to use it. So maybe the problem is not to create a new currency but more to create “new kind of organizations” to develop “new ways to deal” with our “old currency”, and I think it’s what Luigi proposes in his AIRBAG Strategy --sylvie

[en]Currency is part of the system. Of course, we do not have one international currency, so currency speculation is possible, and causes misery. The Euro was a good start. If Mattis and Sigi are talking about one international currency, a Euro for all the world, then I’m all for it! Effectively, this is what there was before the first world war, when every countries currency was based on gold: except that different governments had different gold reserves, so again speculation in currency was possible.
[en]This is a huge topic, and it is hard to do it justice in a few minutes of wiki time a day….

A small transaction tax would take the steam out of currency speculation. So it is not a problem of multiple currencies, the problem is to attack the problem at the appropriate level. The same is true for a number of problems of global economy. Money and economy must be understood as phenomena built on a social consensus, they have been built in a certain context, but the context has changed. The problem is not the banking system in itself, the problem is that big money can’t be spent in a way really useful for its owner. There seem to be no socially accepted way to turn some billion dollars into useful social status. You can’t eat, drink, travel or buy cars or helicopters to spend that amount of money. But let’s assume that e.g. people like Bill Gates could be talked into spending that amount for a GLOBAL CLEAN WATER project, providing clean water stations to all underdeveloped areas, to any village, in the world, gaining access to a UNO BOARD OF ESP (extremely social persons) that is honoured world wide and has an advisory status on all global problems and decisions. The image value of such a project could exceed anything normal marketing can do. The membership and standing in such a board could be made much more desirable and useful than numeric increase of a bank account. Early societies always had a way to socially destroy extreme richness and give it back in exchange of social status. We have to invent a new social culture that re-contains old wisdom. Wiki is a place where social re-design may take place. – HelmutLeitner

[de]ich gebe helmut recht. es geht um den consensus. es wäre ungeheuer spannend und lehrreich zu sehen, ob wir hier sowas hinkriegen. bis jetzt sind noch nicht mal mattis und ich uns völlig einig. außerdem bräuchte ich jemand, der mir luigis ideen erläutert. für viele fachausdrücke hier fehlt mir einfach der hintergrund.
[en]I think helmut is right. It’s about the consensus. It would be extraordinarily interesting and educating to see, if we can do something like that here. Up to now not even mattis and I agree on it completely. I’d also need someone to explain luigis ideas to me. I simply lack the background knowledge for many specific terms.

[en] I am looking for a simple approach - where understanding is not the outcome of an explanation we receive and where languages are not a problem - there may be a clue that a discussion cannot help towards achieving that - it seems to suggest that we need some artwork we can get involved in and maintain - sylvie may help us in that direction - see this english translation of an article about a spanish architect and what sylvie says about him

[en] It would be nice if wikis started to take the role that coffee houses had in defining modern business and politics.
[de] Es waere schoen, wenn Wikis die Rolle uebernehmen koennten, die die Kaffeehaueser bei der Meinungsbildung ueber die heutige Geschaftswelt und die Politik hatten.

[en] This idea to debate such matters in several languages is wonderful, I love it. You try to analyse things in a fresh way, and look at these without prejudices, which is good. But you should also look in the classics : most of your ideas are already there, most of the time are very ancient and have already been widely examined (yes). For instance, look at the chapters I, II and III of “the Capital”, and you will see that (1) what you said is already there, and has always been a leitmotiv for bourgeois utopists, (2) there are other interesting things such that the relation between money and merchandise, and the fetish character of merchandise. One does not even have to be a communist to agree with this. – esc
[fr] Cette façon de débattre comme ça en plusieurs langues est fantastique, j’adore. C’est bien que l’on s’efforce de cerner les choses d’une façon neuve et exempte de préjugés, en même temps le fait que l’on ne tienne pas suffisamment compte des “classiques” a pour résultat que nous réinventons plein de fois la roue. Par exemple, presque tout ce qui est sur cette page se trouve déjà dans les trois premiers chapitres du “Capital” (eh ouais). 1°) Disserter métaphysiquement sur la monnaie et la réinventer est le leitmotiv des économistes bourgeois au cours des temps, 2°) On peut relier monnaie et marchandise (ce que cette page ne fait pas assez) et discuter aussi des origines et du caractère de la marchandise, de son caractère fétiche etc. Et on n’a même pas besoin d’être communiste pour tomber d’accord avec Marx là-dessus. – esc

[en] Another thing : I do not really understand what sigi has in mind when advocating a “virtual money”, but if (1) the form money is a particular form of merchandise (e.g. Marx, I), and (2) informational economy is based on the exchange and sharing of information, then it follows from (1) and (2) that speaking of “virtual money” does make sense only if information is merchandise. – But, this is the point, (a) information can be given without you lose it (as everybody knows), and (b) sometimes information cannot be given, or -that is the same-, what B gets is not what A gave (*). For instance, I can give the De Moivre formula to a lot of people, but only individuals who know what an exponential function and what a complex number are will be able to use it, and even to “get” it. – The point (b) has not really been developed until now. Information is not as egalitarian as matter. – Therefore, from (a) and (b), information is not akin to merchandise, and therefore what you call “virtual money”, (if only it exists), is much more something X that fills the analogy : X is to knowledge what money is to merchandise. – esc
[fr] Autre chose : j’ai certes du mal à voir ce que sigi entend par “monnaie virtuelle”, mais comme (1) la monnaie n’est qu’une marchandise particulière (Marx, I par ex.) et comme (2) une économie informationnelle se base sur l’échange ou le partage de l’information, parler de “monnaie virtuelle” n’a de sens que pour autant que l’information est une marchandise. – Or, (a) qui donne une information ne la perd pas, (b) on ne peut pas toujours donner une info (ou bien, ce que B reçoit n’est pas ce que A lui a donné (*)). Par exemple, je peux certes donner exp(ix)=cos(x)+i.sin(x) à “tout le monde”, mais qui sera en mesure d’en faire usage, ou même tout simplement de le “recevoir” ? – On n’a pas assez développé (b) jusqu’ici. L’information est inégalitaire, plus que la matière en tout cas. – Donc, des points (a) et (b) on déduit que l’information n’est pas marchandise, et que, si une “monnaie virtuelle” veut dire quelque chose, il faut plutôt parler d’un X qui est tel que X est à une connaissance ce que la monnaie est à une marchandise. – esc

[en] (*): I will even say that this is the general case.
[fr] (*): Je prétends même que c’est le cas général.

(PS: I deleted a previous intervention of mine, this one being more developped and generalizing the former)

[en]Very fast. It’s all on WikiDe:ETerra. You have 50 Euro you want to release from corrupt money / turn into non-corrupt money. You pay them on a bank acount and on your eterra global banking system/wiki/whatever account you have 50 eterra. For 20 of them Heather might sell you a niccely knitted HiveMindCap? or I might correct the commas in a German article of your for an eTerra. The important point is, these 50 Euros are out of the corrupt system, they are frozen. 1% of (the unknown) amount of global capital transfered to eTerra and, yup, the wall street goes bye-bye. Very touchy thing, very much lot of big big power involved. Lot of. So think fast, but do act after thinking.

das war mattis. und hier ist mein beispiel: ich möchte 200 euro in virtuelle währung umtauschen.
buchungs modell: die gesamte währung ist immer ein A-Terra. die körnung läuft von A-Terra(1) über B-Terra(1/2), C-Terra(1/4), D-Terra(1/8) u.s.w.
ich möchte, dass wir gemeinsam bestimmen, was wir mit dem geld machen.
@nicolas: geld ist eine besondere ware. das besondere daran: geld ist auch information. und wie helmut schon sagte:es ist consensus, ja, mehr als das, es bestimmt gesellschaftliche verhältnisse. obwohl heute mehr geld da ist, als je zuvor, haben die meisten zuwenig davon. also ist geld auch eine krankheit.
@luigi: ich verstehe muntadas so, das es unser ziel sein soll, einander zu verstehen. das ist auch meine meinung. geduld, aufmerksamkeit und einfache sprache. es ist wirklich so, dass wir nur das erkennen, was wir schon kennen (neues erkennen wir nicht, neues erfahren wir).
@aonghus: ein euro für die welt. und eine welt bank, die uns gehört.
--sigi

[en] @sigi: Of course “Geld ist auch Information” (money is information too), but anything is information, if you like. For instance, my books are information (they contain text which is data), my body is information (it contains DNA that can be modified or healed), my spirit is information (I have ideas and I make notions), my shoes are information (they differ in regard of chirality, so they contain at least one bit of information). – You can always say everything is information, as you can say everything is matter. By the way, saying everything is information is very ancient, it can be found already in Plato, Spinoza, Hobbes, Hume and -of course- Berkeley (who was an irish hacker bishop). – So what matters is not that money be information but how it is related to information. Saying that money is something “semiotic”, or “conventional” is the trap in which all the “bourgeois” economist have fallen, and for this reason they failed to see that the real thing is not in money but in merchandise. Money is the tree that hides the forest. Merchandise is the real problem. Money is just a particular kind of merchandise. And by the way, knowledge is not really a merchandise (even if some people would like that). – esc
[fr] @sigi: Bien entendu que “Geld ist auch Information” (l’argent est aussi information), mais absolument tout est information, si l’on va par là. Par exemple, mes livres sont information (ils contiennent du texte, donc des données), mon corps est information (il contient de l’ADN qui peut être modifié ou guéri), mon esprit est information (j’ai des idées et je forme des concepts), mes pompes sont de l’information (faut distinguer entre la chaussure gauche et la droite; ya donc au moins 1 bit de contenu). – Tu peux toujours dire que tout est de l’information, de même que tu peux toujours dire que tout est de la matière. Au passage, cette idée que tout est information est très ancienne. On la trouve déjà chez Platon, Spinoza, Hobbes, Hume et -bien sûr- Berkeley (un évêque irlandais hacker). – Ce qui compte, en définitive, ce n’est pas que l’argent soit de l’information, mais la nature de son lien à l’information. Dire que la monnaie est quelque chose de l’ordre du signe ou de la convention est la tarte à la crème dans laquelle donnent tous les économistes “bourgeois”, le piège qui fait qu’ils passent à côté de la question beaucoup plus importante de la marchandise. La monnaie est l’arbre qui cache la forêt. C’est la marchandise le problème réel, et la monnaie n’est jamais qu’une marchandise particulière. Et au passage, la connaissance n’est pas vraiment une marchandise (même si certains aimeraient qu’elle en soit une). – esc
[es] @sigi: Claro que si, “Geld ist auch Information” (el dinero es informacion tambien), pero todo es informacion, si es asi. Por ejemplo, mis libros son informacion (hay texto en ellos), mi cuerpo es informacion (hay ADN en el, puede cambiar de estado si tengo una enfermedad), mi espiritu es informacion (tengo ideas, nociones), y hasta sus zapatos son informacion (no son iguales desde el punto de vista de su forma izq./der.). – De toda manera, puedes decir que todo en el mundo es informacion, tan como puedes decir que todo es materia. Esa idea “informatica” es muy anciana: uno la encontra ya en Platon, Spinoza, Hobbes, Hume y, claramente, Berkeley (el obispo y hacker irlandes). – Lo importante, en hecho, no es que dinero sea informacion, sino que precisar la natura de su relacion a informacion. Todos los economistas “burgueses” han faltado decir lo que dinero era, porque no vieron que lo mas importante no es el dinero, sino la mercancia. Dinero es como un arbol que esconderia el bosque. La mercanza es el punto mas importante: dinero solo es una especie particular de mercancia. E incidamente un saber no es precisamente una mercancia (aunque hay gente a qui eso les gustaria). – esc

[en] @nicolas: to say money is merchandise is like saying blood is food. there is no problem with the production of merchandise, but there is a problem with the circulation of money. it doesn’t make the world go round. --sigi

There is no way to solve problems of money without understanding money. The phenomenon of money is not understood. An eTerra wouldn’t solve any problem. As far as I see, money is a symbolic token with a value, that is created and kept by a community. Money is a myth that hides what it is. Money is already virtual, you can’t make it more virtual. The stability of the community makes the symbol money keep its value, because and as long as it is socially respected. If the community breaks down, money can be worthless the next day. If the community decides, money can be worthless the next day. Community is cooperation with the consensus of common good, of synergy, of win-win-situations for all - or it isn’t stable. Money is a great invention to ease cooperation. Economy based on money is a great invention to incorporate egoistic cooperation into the community - laws and taxes are to tame economy and to socially redistribute generated wealth. The social consensus at the bottom of “the invention economy” is: you can become rich, but all shall share some wealth and nobody shall be poor - for the community cares for the weak. This system has been built in a context that has been lost. Economy that is out of bounds is out of the fundamental social consensus and must again be bound by laws. Global economy means global money (doesn’t matter how many currencies). Global money means global social responsibility, because economy and money are inventions that only make sense in the context of a social consensus that holds all people involved. We need a global community that cares for all humans, the poor African peasant as well as the Indian worker. The bottom line is: no hard (technical) system can solve these problems. Only soft (social) developments can. Economy must be told, that it is not a foundation of society, economy is social invention and that it will cease to exist when it isn’t in accord with the implicit social consensus. – HelmutLeitner

I agree with Helmut’s response, for the most part.

I have so much stuff I wish to write here. I’ve written and deleted paragraphs. I deleted them because I don’t want to tie myself to this conversation- I’m working on other things right now.

I really really wish there was a money wiki, and I wish someone went to the effort of seeding it, and rounding up the people interested in money, and putting them there, so to speak. (Obviously it’s not like that, but the point is understood: People interested in money systems on a money wiki.)

I’ve looked at the Transitioner; I don’t think I’d be able to participate there, because I would likely start a ForestFire. It’d be an IntegrationAndIdentity conflict: I would likely be trying to warp the space entirely around my perspective, and I don’t think the people there would like it. I could casually observe, and casually contribute bits and pieces there, but I don’t think I could be “useful.”

So I am hoping for another Money wiki. :)

(This is part of the reason why I think the future of wiki / Internet self-organization is SmallGroupsFittingTogether?- it allows individuals to collaborate in their small spheres, and then report to each other on what they think, and even work together as perspective allows.)

Summary of these page in Some Words
I have not put links between words so everybody is able to project their own :-)
To summarize my point of view :
Currency and Information can be linked to the same Elements which can also be called Contexts when some elements are linked together .
Currency and Information have a value but this value is fluctuating . The value change according to “crossed context “.
--sylvie

people begin to stir in the house. where else in the wiki world is such a intakte menschliche gemeinschaft (my name for hive mind)? :)
and more people will come. --sigi (@sylvie: a)in your word room i miss a word: necker cube. ;) b)what is the value of this virtual money page?)
a)joker ;-)
b)[en]The value of this page is relative to the territory which form present people I mean a potential of resources to make it evolves :)
[fr]La valeur de cette page est relative au territoire que forme les personnes présentes c’est à dire un potentiel de ressources pour la faire évoluer :-) --sylvie

POSTED BY EXPERIENTIA:

http://www.kashklask.com

“How can you rob a bank in a world without money?” wonders science fiction writer Bruce Sterling, one of the collaborators of the new foresight project KashKlash?.

KashKlash?is a lively platform where you can debate future scenarios for economic and cultural exchange. Beyond today’s financial turmoil, what new systems might appear? Global/local, tangible/intangible, digital/physical? On the KashKlash? site, you can explore potential worlds where traditional financial transactions have disappeared, blended, or mutated into unexpected forms. Understand the near future, and help shape it!

Imagine yourself deprived of all of today’s conventional financial resources. Maybe you’re a refugee or stateless — or maybe it’s the systems themselves that have gone astray. Yet you still have your laptop, the Internet, and a broadband mobile connection. What would you do to create a new informal economy that would help you get by? What would you live on? E-barter? Rationing? Gadgets? Google juice? Cellphone minutes? Imagine a whole world approaching that condition. Which of today’s major power-players would win and lose, thrive or fail? What strange new roles would tomorrow’s technology fill?

Besides Bruce Sterling, the initial collaborators are Régine Debatty (of we-make-money-not-art), Nicolas Nova (LIFT) and Joshua Klein (author and hacker), who have been collaborating on initiating the discussion.

KashKlash? is now opening up to you. You can join and follow the debate of our experts or contribute yourself by leaving a comment on the different matters or fill out our KashKlash? questionnaire.

This public domain project is conceived and led by Heather Moore of Vodafone’s Global User Experience Team and run by Experientia, an international forward-looking user experience design company based in Turin, Italy.

Check the project description for more info.

Wanna add this press release to your blog/facebook/whatever? click on the share button below or copy and paste this script.

try als our questionnaire http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=f_2ffyDCPS_2b4auKyX9D8ggxA_3d_3d

(CommunityWikiFooter)

Define external redirect: JeckylIslandConference HiveMindCap KashKlash SmallGroupsFittingTogether

EditNearLinks: OnlineCommunity ForestFire CommunityOnline

Languages: