3 ms·

Reminds me of something Paul Graham said a few months ago: "Will ownership turn out to be largely a hack people resorted to before they had the infrastructure

• jacquesm 13y ago
  Communes have been sharing things properly as long as mankind has been around. The trick here is that we have redefined 'properly' as accountably, but it need not keep the beancounters happy and you can still share stuff. The taxman hates that kind of thing, they like to see receipts.
  • sopooneo 13y ago
    I'd say communes are small scale, and the dynamics of efficiently sharing among a larger number of people are fundamentally different.
    • jacquesm 13y ago
      Some Ashrams are huge, and that's only one form of commune. A quick bit of googling turned up Auroville, 2000 inhabitants.
      • nbouscal 13y ago
        "Huge" in context, sure, but compared to the rest of the world? 2,000 inhabitants is impressive and all, but that solution couldn't possibly scale to 10 million.
      • lobotryas 13y ago
        That's cool. Can this scale to 2,000,000,000?
        • jarek 13y ago
          Does setting up 100,000 communes count?
        • lobotryas 13y ago
          That counts, however, unless each commune is completely independent, you run into meta issues of interactions between communes. Specifically: unless we take incredibly restrictive precautions to ensure equality, there will always be some losers and some winners.
• malyk 13y ago
  Um, don't we already have things set up to share things properly and call them Libraries? In Oakland there is the Tool Lending Library, where you can borrow tools from a screw driver all the way up to gas lawn mowers, electric trimmers, etc. So, we know we can cover books, magazines, music, and tools. What other things does it make sense to stick in the library?
  • pavel_lishin 13y ago
    Furniture. We throw a party, on average, once a month. It's nice to have chairs and a table for these, so we have a table and six chairs, which we use approximately 3% of the time.