4 ms·

One reference is “Free” by Chris Anderson, https://www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-Chris-Anderson/dp/1401322905/ https://www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-C

by mch82 5y ago

One reference is “Free” by Chris Anderson, https://www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-Chris-Anderson/dp/1401322905/ https://www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-Chris-Anderson/dp... DHH has written about abundance as part of his approach to Rails, https://world.hey.com/dhh/i-won-t-let-you-pay-me-for-my-open-source-d7cf4568 https://world.hey.com/dhh/i-won-t-let-you-pay-me-for-my-open... The “Post-scarcity economy” article on Wikipedia lists a number of references, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-scarcity_economy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-scarcity_economy Generally, computing trends toward abundance. Computers are priced about the same, but do more each generation.

Karrot_Kream 5y ago
Right but none of these folks were associated with the origins of the net or the web at all. They're people who either inferred post-scarcity through trends they saw or wanted to apply an ideology to the net and the web. DHH is the only technical person in that list. The reason this distinction is important is because a lot of folks try to make the case that the ideological origins of computer networking were with an eye toward post-scarcity, but this seems incorrect to me. Instead it seems to be ideological anger that the internet is not supporting post-scarcity economics.
- mch82 5y ago
  Tim Berners-Lee, “The Many Meanings of Open”, https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Open.html https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Open.html > “The World Wide Web turns 25 next year. We have come a long way, but we must all continue to push for these various forms of openness in the appropriate places. Only then can we ensure that the Web is for everyone.” While his essay doesn’t use the words “abundance” or “post-scarcity”, it gets pretty close. My guess is that the guy who gave the Internet away for free probably approaches technology from an abundance perspective. > “…but this seems incorrect to me.” I’m curious what has led you to the opinion these people are wrong? I’m interested to know about histories of the web that reflect a philosophy of scarcity.
  - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
    > While his essay doesn’t use the words “abundance” or “post-scarcity”, it gets pretty close. My guess is that the guy who gave the Internet away for free probably approaches technology from an abundance perspective. Thanks for that essay. I actually didn't see anything that got close to post scarcity. The only point that seemed to touch on it was the point about Open Access but it seemed to be closely scoped to academic work. > My guess is that the guy who gave the Internet away for free probably approaches technology from an abundance perspective. Maybe? Giving things away for free doesn't lead to a post-scarcity mindset. Not every person that donated to charity or volunteers with their time thinks the world can get there either. > I’m curious what has led you to the opinion these people are wrong? I’m interested to know about histories of the web that reflect a philosophy of scarcity. It's hard because a "philosophy of scarcity" is pretty ill-defined. As early as 2016 [1] Berners-Lee was pushing the W3C to standardize web payments. And HTTP status code 402 Payment Required was in the HTTP spec since at least RFC 2068 [2] in 1997. So at least since then someone thought that the internet would be used to facilitate payment. But that's enough uncertainty for me to comfortably say that the internet was not designed for (or even against) post scarcity in mind. Therefore there's no ideological connection between post-scarcity and the net or the web. [1]: https://www.w3.org/blog/wpwg/2016/12/16/web-payments-traction-in-2016-and-looking-ahead/ https://www.w3.org/blog/wpwg/2016/12/16/web-payments-tractio... [2]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068
    - mch82 5y ago
      You’re making the argument that if the web has a payments API/protocol then the community building the web can’t simultaneously aspire toward a future of abundance. That doesn’t make sense. Some items, like tickets to the World Cup, are scarce. A payments API/protocol allows scarce items to be sold online. Presence of the API/protocol doesn’t prevent simultaneous distribution of abundant items online, or imply creators of the web are anything but pragmatic. Even the Free Software Foundation is pragmatic about people charging a fee for GPL software (e.g. sell a DVD with the software), as long as the GPL licensed source code is included. FSF hopes you’ll give away the DVD, but understands if you choose not to. It seems like the idea that people are working toward abundance really bothers you. How come?

by mch82 5y ago

Karrot_Kream 5y ago

Right but none of these folks were associated with the origins of the net or the web at all. They're people who either inferred post-scarcity through trends they saw or wanted to apply an ideology to the net and the web. DHH is the only technical person in that list. The reason this distinction is important is because a lot of folks try to make the case that the ideological origins of computer networking were with an eye toward post-scarcity, but this seems incorrect to me. Instead it seems to be ideological anger that the internet is not supporting post-scarcity economics.

mch82 5y ago
Tim Berners-Lee, “The Many Meanings of Open”, https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Open.html https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Open.html > “The World Wide Web turns 25 next year. We have come a long way, but we must all continue to push for these various forms of openness in the appropriate places. Only then can we ensure that the Web is for everyone.” While his essay doesn’t use the words “abundance” or “post-scarcity”, it gets pretty close. My guess is that the guy who gave the Internet away for free probably approaches technology from an abundance perspective. > “…but this seems incorrect to me.” I’m curious what has led you to the opinion these people are wrong? I’m interested to know about histories of the web that reflect a philosophy of scarcity.
- Karrot_Kream 5y ago
  > While his essay doesn’t use the words “abundance” or “post-scarcity”, it gets pretty close. My guess is that the guy who gave the Internet away for free probably approaches technology from an abundance perspective. Thanks for that essay. I actually didn't see anything that got close to post scarcity. The only point that seemed to touch on it was the point about Open Access but it seemed to be closely scoped to academic work. > My guess is that the guy who gave the Internet away for free probably approaches technology from an abundance perspective. Maybe? Giving things away for free doesn't lead to a post-scarcity mindset. Not every person that donated to charity or volunteers with their time thinks the world can get there either. > I’m curious what has led you to the opinion these people are wrong? I’m interested to know about histories of the web that reflect a philosophy of scarcity. It's hard because a "philosophy of scarcity" is pretty ill-defined. As early as 2016 [1] Berners-Lee was pushing the W3C to standardize web payments. And HTTP status code 402 Payment Required was in the HTTP spec since at least RFC 2068 [2] in 1997. So at least since then someone thought that the internet would be used to facilitate payment. But that's enough uncertainty for me to comfortably say that the internet was not designed for (or even against) post scarcity in mind. Therefore there's no ideological connection between post-scarcity and the net or the web. [1]: https://www.w3.org/blog/wpwg/2016/12/16/web-payments-traction-in-2016-and-looking-ahead/ https://www.w3.org/blog/wpwg/2016/12/16/web-payments-tractio... [2]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068
  - mch82 5y ago
    You’re making the argument that if the web has a payments API/protocol then the community building the web can’t simultaneously aspire toward a future of abundance. That doesn’t make sense. Some items, like tickets to the World Cup, are scarce. A payments API/protocol allows scarce items to be sold online. Presence of the API/protocol doesn’t prevent simultaneous distribution of abundant items online, or imply creators of the web are anything but pragmatic. Even the Free Software Foundation is pragmatic about people charging a fee for GPL software (e.g. sell a DVD with the software), as long as the GPL licensed source code is included. FSF hopes you’ll give away the DVD, but understands if you choose not to. It seems like the idea that people are working toward abundance really bothers you. How come?