12 ms·

"Digital" cooperatives using (optionally) open source platforms is an idea that should be much more explored imho. The concept applies to so many verticals inv

"Digital" cooperatives using (optionally) open source platforms is an idea that should be much more explored imho. The concept applies to so many verticals involving small companies or individual operators (from taxis, to hotels, to restaurants, to real estate agents, local bookstores, cinemas, to game developers etc. etc.) The inability of large numbers of small entities to coordinate and cooperate in the digital era means they create the conditions for third parties to completely take over the intermediation with clients and use that leverage to extract unreasonably large rents. In fact the extreme "taxes" small businesses and individuals have to pay to shrewd digital platform owners are multiples of the cost of development of the platforms themselves. In other words, if a collection of independent entities cannot get they act together to codevelop digital infastructure (that will benefit all of them) somebody else will do it for them and will be eating their lunch. This reclaiming of their market / ownership of digital tools might be challenging in conditions of rapid technical innovation. The autocracy of a top-down corporate structure is more effective than a democratic collective. Yet despite incessant marketing noise currently we are in a rather stagnating phase so there is a window of opportunity to reclaim some agency.

usrusr 3y ago
So much "this!". The hotel/booking is the most blatant example, because the bar for "good enough" wouldn't really be that far up. The only moat they have is worldwide discoverability (a regional cooperative just won't reach people who visit once, cooperatives would have to start global, or at least be really, really good at federating) and that the threshold for critical mass in that market is winner takes all: at least when you are not looking for that one spot for a two-weeks getaway (you might even enjoy trawling multiple platforms) but going through serial booking for a road trip (doesn't even matter wether it's bulk ahead or on the go),
- TylerE 3y ago
  Depends on the vertical. I would not be real comfortable booking lodging on some random portal, especially if we're talking more of an AirBnB thing vs hotels.
  - liotier 3y ago
    A cooperative booking organization would have strong incentive to keep their members in the straight & narrow. It is a cooperation problem and institutional enforcement is a proven recipe for ensuring that.
    - actionfromafar 3y ago
      Hm, it depends? In a near-monopoly situation, maybe not so much?
  - usrusr 3y ago
    Yeah, that's one of the moats some have but booking.com has not: you don't just pop up a hotel from nothing, and the hypothetical failure mode of complete fakes appearing out of thin air is not only solved by payment on site but also by the local hotel owner community having a financial interest in policing their turf. Or not, could be a fun plot for some speculative fiction: on a cooperative post-booking.com platform, hotel owners in a remote valley discover that they can earn quite nicely by offering "rescue nights" to guest who fell for a series of fake listings they keep up, untraceably because the fakes lack a payment channel to follow. Add some Bates vibes to the one hotelier who refuses to take part in the scheme for multi-layered tension.
    - TylerE 3y ago
      There are already a gazillion scams that prey on naive tourists.
    - gfedtbyby 3y ago
      Booking will likely side with the consumer if something goes wrong. A cooperative controlled by hotel owners? I'm not so sure.. That + trust + customer support at least for me is worth more than at most 5-10% you could save.
  - nologic01 3y ago
    Not sure where the "random portal" creeps in. A portal underwritten by all the hoteliers in a country / region is abouy as much assurance you can get.
TotalCrackpot 3y ago
> The autocracy of a top-down corporate structure is more effective than a democratic collective. If that was the case then Soviet Union's central planning would be more efficient than Liberal democracy's market capitalism. The efficiency of corporations stems from unfair advantages states gives them like intellectual property rights or from socialising their losses and privatising their gains from public budget.
- nologic01 3y ago
  Not sure this a good counterexample. In fact we have plenty of proof that loose collectives dont perform well under rapid change conditions. There is no reason why the ubers and bookings etc should not have been actually platforms developed and owned by the respective sectors using more or less the same technologies. In fact there are some examples. The lag in responding to a risk of opportunity is intrinsic to a consensus system. The long term fitness is an entirely different matter.
  - onetokeoverthe 3y ago
    [dead]
- peoplefromibiza 3y ago
  That's assuming that the Soviet Union central planning was an authocratic top-down system that worked straight from decision makers to execution. It wasn't. It was layered in the same way a democracy is, just under different pre conditions and internal rules.
  - TotalCrackpot 3y ago
    Elaborate on this please, after all even in "autocratic" corporations we have internal power struggles etc. So are they democratic too? Suddenly everything is like democracy?
    - peoplefromibiza 3y ago
zonotope 3y ago
This sounds a lot like some of the rationale behind "web3"
- Nextgrid 3y ago
  Problem is that web3 tries to tie everything to a cryptocurrency token, not willing to accept the fact that as soon as something happens off-chain and in the real world, most/all advantages of using cryptocurrencies and blockchains go away.
  - kykeonaut 3y ago
    It really is a shame that all blockchains (AFAIK) are tied to cryptocurrency as reward for participating in their consensus mechanism when it is not necessary the only way to do things. In fact, I believe blockchain will never be decentralized as long as there is a means of accumulation of power over the blockchain, in many cases the accumulation of PoW computing power, or in PoS the accumulation of the cryptocurrency itself. I also believe (without any basis other than the spirit of the correspondence from Satoshi) that Satoshi released Bitcoin in 2008 as a proof of concept, not as a project meant to be adopted by every institution. Bitcoin was created to address the Byzantine Generals problem, and AFAIK it was the first to truly do so. It was not created to be the blueprint to every other blockchain ever.
    - Nextgrid 3y ago
      The whole concept of decentralized trust-less environments requires some way to prevent malicious attackers from taking over the network. Proof of work, while extremely wasteful, does that job. The main problem is that trust-lessness and decentralization isn't actually necessary, especially for most things that exist in the real world and are at the mercy of the legal systems they operate within (this applies to cryptocurrencies as well - the government doesn't need to break crypto, it can just make interacting/transacting with it illegal). For a lot of real-world projects, the legal system is an adequate protection. Centralization doesn't require a profit motive - the central party could be set up as a non-profit and then have all the advantages of a centralized system while avoiding a lot of the drawbacks we see in for-profit operations.
2143 3y ago
Agreed. If there's a 3rd party aggregator (for taxis, restaurants or whatever), the final price that the customer pays would include both the aggregator's profits + the individual service provider's profits. If the individual service providers all came together and made an app themselves, the aggregator-profits can be eliminated, resulting in potentially reduced prices for the customers. I think (probably wrongly) one of the reasons they don't usually come together is because by making such an app they would effectively be helping their competitor(s), which they may not necessarily want to (because they don't see the bigger picture?). In my city (in Asia) a subset of taxi drivers realized this and even made an app, but it didn't really work well due to poor marketing and because visitors to the city didn't want to set-up a new app just for 2 days etc. On the other hand, if all the service-providers do co-operatively make an app for their services, what prevents a cartel from developing? The government? I guess there should be a high baseline level of trust to make it work.
- pydry 3y ago
  Maybe it would work better if the local government runs the app (contracted out obvs) and bans all the others. I dont really mind installing a new app for a new city provided the onboarding is easy. The part that bugs me the most is researching what app to use in what place. It's not straightforward.
  - mecha_ghidorah 3y ago
    > Maybe it would work better if the local government runs the app (contracted out obvs) and bans all the others. I like the idea of that but the issue is software that people have to use with no alternative end up having no real motivation to be user friendly or stable or anything like that. They own the market and nobody can ever leave it
- WWLink 3y ago
  If every city has an app, you also lower the trust of the drivers because you don't have a way to know if the passengers are behaving well (good reviews) or not.
2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
I'm surprised streamer or other content creator co-ops aren't a thing, especially after all the Twitch drama.
clarkevans 3y ago
> "Digital" cooperatives "Platform cooperative" is the term used in the literature. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_cooperative https://platform.coop/ https://platform.coop/ I particularly like Nathan Schneider's writings: https://nathanschneider.info/articles-list/ https://nathanschneider.info/articles-list/
hoseja 3y ago
This is like chum in the water for various parasites IMO.

usrusr 3y ago

So much "this!". The hotel/booking is the most blatant example, because the bar for "good enough" wouldn't really be that far up. The only moat they have is worldwide discoverability (a regional cooperative just won't reach people who visit once, cooperatives would have to start global, or at least be really, really good at federating) and that the threshold for critical mass in that market is winner takes all: at least when you are not looking for that one spot for a two-weeks getaway (you might even enjoy trawling multiple platforms) but going through serial booking for a road trip (doesn't even matter wether it's bulk ahead or on the go),

TylerE 3y ago
Depends on the vertical. I would not be real comfortable booking lodging on some random portal, especially if we're talking more of an AirBnB thing vs hotels.
- liotier 3y ago
  A cooperative booking organization would have strong incentive to keep their members in the straight & narrow. It is a cooperation problem and institutional enforcement is a proven recipe for ensuring that.
  - actionfromafar 3y ago
    Hm, it depends? In a near-monopoly situation, maybe not so much?
- usrusr 3y ago
  Yeah, that's one of the moats some have but booking.com has not: you don't just pop up a hotel from nothing, and the hypothetical failure mode of complete fakes appearing out of thin air is not only solved by payment on site but also by the local hotel owner community having a financial interest in policing their turf. Or not, could be a fun plot for some speculative fiction: on a cooperative post-booking.com platform, hotel owners in a remote valley discover that they can earn quite nicely by offering "rescue nights" to guest who fell for a series of fake listings they keep up, untraceably because the fakes lack a payment channel to follow. Add some Bates vibes to the one hotelier who refuses to take part in the scheme for multi-layered tension.
  - TylerE 3y ago
    There are already a gazillion scams that prey on naive tourists.
  - gfedtbyby 3y ago
    Booking will likely side with the consumer if something goes wrong. A cooperative controlled by hotel owners? I'm not so sure.. That + trust + customer support at least for me is worth more than at most 5-10% you could save.
- nologic01 3y ago
  Not sure where the "random portal" creeps in. A portal underwritten by all the hoteliers in a country / region is abouy as much assurance you can get.

TotalCrackpot 3y ago

> The autocracy of a top-down corporate structure is more effective than a democratic collective. If that was the case then Soviet Union's central planning would be more efficient than Liberal democracy's market capitalism. The efficiency of corporations stems from unfair advantages states gives them like intellectual property rights or from socialising their losses and privatising their gains from public budget.

nologic01 3y ago
Not sure this a good counterexample. In fact we have plenty of proof that loose collectives dont perform well under rapid change conditions. There is no reason why the ubers and bookings etc should not have been actually platforms developed and owned by the respective sectors using more or less the same technologies. In fact there are some examples. The lag in responding to a risk of opportunity is intrinsic to a consensus system. The long term fitness is an entirely different matter.
- onetokeoverthe 3y ago
  [dead]
peoplefromibiza 3y ago
That's assuming that the Soviet Union central planning was an authocratic top-down system that worked straight from decision makers to execution. It wasn't. It was layered in the same way a democracy is, just under different pre conditions and internal rules.
- TotalCrackpot 3y ago
  Elaborate on this please, after all even in "autocratic" corporations we have internal power struggles etc. So are they democratic too? Suddenly everything is like democracy?
  - peoplefromibiza 3y ago

zonotope 3y ago

This sounds a lot like some of the rationale behind "web3"

Nextgrid 3y ago
Problem is that web3 tries to tie everything to a cryptocurrency token, not willing to accept the fact that as soon as something happens off-chain and in the real world, most/all advantages of using cryptocurrencies and blockchains go away.
- kykeonaut 3y ago
  It really is a shame that all blockchains (AFAIK) are tied to cryptocurrency as reward for participating in their consensus mechanism when it is not necessary the only way to do things. In fact, I believe blockchain will never be decentralized as long as there is a means of accumulation of power over the blockchain, in many cases the accumulation of PoW computing power, or in PoS the accumulation of the cryptocurrency itself. I also believe (without any basis other than the spirit of the correspondence from Satoshi) that Satoshi released Bitcoin in 2008 as a proof of concept, not as a project meant to be adopted by every institution. Bitcoin was created to address the Byzantine Generals problem, and AFAIK it was the first to truly do so. It was not created to be the blueprint to every other blockchain ever.
  - Nextgrid 3y ago
    The whole concept of decentralized trust-less environments requires some way to prevent malicious attackers from taking over the network. Proof of work, while extremely wasteful, does that job. The main problem is that trust-lessness and decentralization isn't actually necessary, especially for most things that exist in the real world and are at the mercy of the legal systems they operate within (this applies to cryptocurrencies as well - the government doesn't need to break crypto, it can just make interacting/transacting with it illegal). For a lot of real-world projects, the legal system is an adequate protection. Centralization doesn't require a profit motive - the central party could be set up as a non-profit and then have all the advantages of a centralized system while avoiding a lot of the drawbacks we see in for-profit operations.

2143 3y ago

Agreed. If there's a 3rd party aggregator (for taxis, restaurants or whatever), the final price that the customer pays would include both the aggregator's profits + the individual service provider's profits. If the individual service providers all came together and made an app themselves, the aggregator-profits can be eliminated, resulting in potentially reduced prices for the customers. I think (probably wrongly) one of the reasons they don't usually come together is because by making such an app they would effectively be helping their competitor(s), which they may not necessarily want to (because they don't see the bigger picture?). In my city (in Asia) a subset of taxi drivers realized this and even made an app, but it didn't really work well due to poor marketing and because visitors to the city didn't want to set-up a new app just for 2 days etc. On the other hand, if all the service-providers do co-operatively make an app for their services, what prevents a cartel from developing? The government? I guess there should be a high baseline level of trust to make it work.

pydry 3y ago
Maybe it would work better if the local government runs the app (contracted out obvs) and bans all the others. I dont really mind installing a new app for a new city provided the onboarding is easy. The part that bugs me the most is researching what app to use in what place. It's not straightforward.
- mecha_ghidorah 3y ago
  > Maybe it would work better if the local government runs the app (contracted out obvs) and bans all the others. I like the idea of that but the issue is software that people have to use with no alternative end up having no real motivation to be user friendly or stable or anything like that. They own the market and nobody can ever leave it
WWLink 3y ago
If every city has an app, you also lower the trust of the drivers because you don't have a way to know if the passengers are behaving well (good reviews) or not.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

I'm surprised streamer or other content creator co-ops aren't a thing, especially after all the Twitch drama.

clarkevans 3y ago

> "Digital" cooperatives "Platform cooperative" is the term used in the literature. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_cooperative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_cooperative https://platform.coop/ https://platform.coop/ I particularly like Nathan Schneider's writings: https://nathanschneider.info/articles-list/ https://nathanschneider.info/articles-list/

hoseja 3y ago

This is like chum in the water for various parasites IMO.