layout: post title: The Innovation Commons created: 1128139057 categories:

• Vancouver
• vancouver
• innovation commons

[Cross posted from the wiki.]

Inspired by such diverse influences as Dave Winer’s post about this for Silicon Valley, the Queen Street Commons in Prince Edward Island, and the serendipity of continuously meeting Vancouver’s local tech/entreprenuer community at Take 5 slurping lattes and free wireless, I’m announcing the kick off meeting for organizing Vancouver’s Innovation Commons. I’m suggesting 6:30pm next Wednesday. Steamworks or Raincity Studio’s Video Monster are two possible locations, please leave a comment suggesting an alternate.

Right now, I see the concept of the Innovation Commons tying together a network of physical locations around the world. The other people thinking along the same lines page lists links to thoughts and existing locations. For Vancouver’s location, here is the working mission statement:

Build a physical, 24/7 space where Vancouver’s entrepreneur community can gather to motivate each other’s innovation.

I make the distinction of the Innovation Commons as a network, because I think each place has to have it’s own self-sustaining community. Part of that is having a connection with that place, right down to having a name that people can relate to. Charlottetown is small enough that "Queen Street" immediately evokes the locality. We need the same thing for the Vancouver location. So, coming up with an identity/name/brand will be part of the first meeting.

We have the good fortune to have connected with a group of four university students from the Sauder School of Business at the University of British Columbia. Nik, Stacy, Elicia, and Cam — thanks for being on board. They’re going to be helping put together a business plan.

I’ve already spoken with Dean Punzo of Take 5 Cafe. He’s on board in principle as the "anchor tenant" that will provide the cafe in the public space. His location at Granville and Hastings already plays host to dozens of "in the know" people. Providing much-needed sustenance and caffeine to entrepreneurs, as well as catering for after hours events such as AGMs, launch parties or other such events, this should be a profitable, self-sustaining business.

How to get involved/keep track? I recently set up a wiki running on Drupal and hosted by my company Bryght. The Innovation Commons page is the "top" of most of the information. Please tag all contributed pages as "innovation commons", which you can see a filter of here — http://wiki.bryght.com/tags/innovation-commons. There is an RSS feed for this tag here.

What follows after the jump are some hopes and dreams for Vancouver’s node of the Innovation Commons:

• provide 24/7 access on a membership basis — work on your great ideas any time of day or night, without pesky cafe closing times
• provide affordable office space and shared resources for entrepreneurs and start ups
• serve as a location/funding organization where motivated co-op students (see University of Waterloo, University of Victoria) can spend semesters developing their own business ideas and/or working on open source projects, rather than more traditional work placements with actual companies
• bring the power of small teams to large companies: rent space and buy memberships for your employees (I’m looking at you, ActiveState and Blast Radius) to interact with the wider universe of small teams and innovative ideas; or even let your employees do "20% work" on their own projects like Google does, working at the commons one day per week
• providing a physical space for various meetups; ActiveState does a great job of doing this now, but we need access to the Internet, people! And, it should be open to everything from Vancouver Company of Friend’s Sunday Jams to Biodiesel enthusiasts and social venture groups
• (insert more ideas here — create a new page on the wiki)

Want to participate? Please use the wiki, and add your name to the list of Innovation Commons Supporters.

layout: post title: "Innovation Commons request: post a video on why you want the commons" created: 1132743363 categories:

• Vancouver
• video
• vancouver
• innovation commons

The New Enterprise Development team from UBC is nearing the end of their class, and are about to do a final presentation. They’re asking for people to submit video clips explaining why they want something like the Innovation Commons to exist. Of course, my interest is seeing this actually happen here in Vancouver, but I think the model would work well in any city in the world: throw a bunch of smart, independent, motivated people together in one space and let collaboration and innovation blossom. Hmmm…too schmalzy? Perhaps, but tell us why you want something like this in your own city — the students are going to put together a video montage. Time is short: their presentation is on Thursday morning, so your post pretty much needs to be up by tomorrow. A podcast would probably work, too.

— I’ll be updating this post later with my own video clip —

Update: Aargh. The video is sitting at home in draft mode. I’m uploading a video filled with a high number of "ums" per minute that I took with my cameraphone just now. Here’s the 3gp file.

Actually, thinking more about this, it would be great if the team’s presentation (which includes a business model, among other things) could be made available for people to run with in their own city…hmm, I smell some Creative Commons licensing coming up.

P.S. Need a place to put your video? Roland wrote up his recent experiences on video sharing services with lots of different suggestions.

8 principles for managing a commons§

[[Elinor Ostrom]]. [[commons]].

A forgotten revolutionary: Thomas Spence on saving the commons§

URL :

https://climateandcapitalism.com/2022/06/04/a-forgotten-revolutionary-thomas-spence-on-saving-the-commons/

[[Thomas Spence]].

Acoustic Commons§

URL : http://acousticommons.net/

Live streaming of little isolated pockets of nature.

Currently enjoying Pond, South Walney.

Acoustic Commons is dedicated to building resilient networks across sites, distributing creative technical resources and cultural know-how and contributing to the long term cultivation of knowledge commons.

• #pull [[knowledge commons]] [[agora chapter]]

• #pull a [[knowledge commons]] as provisioned and maintained by an [[Agora]].

• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108901692100931369 pull

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1563941690204950528 pull

• [[2023-01-06 21:00:46]] [[@flancian:matrix.org]] (link):
  • this is what I’d try to do with default with an [[Agora Commons]] btw ;)

• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/112520662509956827 pull

• [[2024-05-28 20:44:14+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] (link):

  • @billseitz I would like to change to a better provider in general; with feedback maybe #openai could also learn and become a better citizen of the [[AI commons]]?

Alternatives for the Internet: A Journey into Decentralised Network Architectures and Information Commons§

URL :

https://triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/1201/1379

Journal : [[Communication, Capitalism & Critique]]

Cloud commons§

Code commons§

tech giants have built much of their empires on a code commons

– [[Seeding the Wild]]

#go https://bin.snopyta.org/?b1816b0a2a0ac4d3#8NnwC2e1N4rmkbCYDuy7WVWUMarjrVhr18bdJFGrJVb8

• [[2022-04-28 18:49:44]] [[@vera:fairydust.space]] (link):
  • [[collaboration commons]]

• a [[project]].
  • #go https://collectivesensecommons.org/

• https://collectivesensecommons.org/
• [[massive wiki]]

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1473045755460046851 pull

communication commons§

communication commons promises meaningful engagement, participation, and deliberation—practices associated with the exercise of other types of democratic rights

– [[Undoing Optimization: Civic Action in Smart Cities]]

Comparing market, state and commons§

Comparing [[market]], [[state]] and [[commons]].

They are all different ways in which you can produce and allocate goods and services, so it’s interesting to compare and contrast.

The market is based on private ownership, and it is controlled by individuals and corporations. The allocation of resources in the market is determined by prices and competition.

The state is based on public ownership, and it is controlled by a central authority, such as a government or a bureaucracy. The allocation of resources in the state is determined by regulation and planning.

The commons are based on community ownership, and they are controlled by the people who use and manage them. The allocation of resources in the commons is determined by use and stewardship.

Overall, the market, the state, and the commons are different forms of ownership, control, and allocation. The market is based on private ownership and competition, the state is based on public ownership and regulation, and the commons are based on community ownership and collaboration.

– ChatGPT, 2022, response to "compare market, state, and commons in a table please"

Creating a digital commons§

URL : https://www.ippr.org/research/publications/creating-a-digital-commons

Author : [[James Meadway]]

Creative Commons§

• A [[license]].
  • [[go]] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_license pull
• Also a [[non-profit]]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons pull
• [[flancia]] is [[creative commons attribution-sharealike 4.0 international]] and [[apache]].

Creative Commons§

• [[jonny]] https://social.coop/@jonny/109046500252503178 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109075955694381526 pull
• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109904967009521418 pull
• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/111642074823559844 pull

• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108397925389930067 pull

• [[2023-02-21 21:58:28+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] (link):

  • #Flancia is [[Creative Commons]] and an exercise of [[Working in Public]].

    Here, an application of what I call #Protopoi, being an operation of incremental improvement, in this case some cleanup and updates for the rolling calendar.

• [[2023-12-25 16:47:50+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] (link):

  • Digital art, live on the internet, ca. 2023-2027, [[Creative Commons]].

• [[mjohanning@birds.town]] https://birds.town/@mjohanning/110661376961578946 pull

cryptocommons§

data commons§

"data of the people, by the people, for the people" (https://datacommons.barcelona/en/)

What is a data commons?§

A data commons is a software platform along with a governance framework that together allow a community to manage, analyze and share its data.

– 3 Key Steps to a Successful Data Commons - data.org

in an early definition of “data commons,” human-computer-interaction researchers Dana Cuff and colleagues described them as “repositories generated through decentralized collection, shared freely, and amenable to distributed sense-making” and noted that these repositories “have been proposed as transforming the pursuit of science but also advocacy, art, play, and politics.”

– [[Undoing Optimization: Civic Action in Smart Cities]]

Don’t forget the commoning part of it§

https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/

In Bristol, data commons, rather than being only stocks or stores of citizen-generated data, became sites to develop relationships of solidarity through the tolerance of friction, tension, and dispute about how data connects with things that matter to people.

– [[Undoing Optimization: Civic Action in Smart Cities]]

For example, Google’s datacommons.org, doesn’t really feel like a commons. Where’s the community governance? A data repo managed by a big tech corp is not a commons.

Why? What are they for?§

A counter to big tech data collection.

We need a new way of thinking about data not as a commodity to be further protected by stronger intellectual property laws but as a collective resource that could be used to empower citizens and provide them with tools to tackle their own problems.

– [[Platform socialism]]

What’s the problem?§

A reliance on private companies to provide the infrastructure of projects has led to a lack of control over how data is collected and handled. Companies currently use data collected through digital platforms as a commodity to generate economic value for shareholders. Data ends up being siloed and controlled by a few individuals with little benefit flowing to citizens. Due to the way it has been abused by these companies, the very idea of data collection has developed sinister connotations of surveillance and manipulation. When platforms do produce reports they often involve the highly questionable and selective use of data to promote the company and shine a positive light on its activities.

– [[Platform socialism]]

What are the benefits?§

A data commons has a huge potential to create a launching pad for further innovation and development. It provides enormous public benefit while at the same time putting citizens in control of their digital future.

– [[Platform socialism]]

How?§

There is no single model of how a data commons should be organised. Each institution would need to be designed based on the needs of the community, the type of data and how it could be collected and used. These would range from large-scale public [[data trusts]] (for health, science and mobility) to commercial and financial data firms and local [[data co-operatives]].

– [[Platform socialism]]

Examples§

• [[DECODE]]?
• [[Open Street Map]] ([[Is Open Street Map a data commons?]])
• [[Open Repair Alliance]]?

Limitations / criticisms§

One tension of a data commons is the balance between the potential benefits of large shared troves of data versus the harm that could be caused from their misuse. Data collection and use must be consensual, fair and transparent. In some cases, certain types of data simply shouldn’t be collected because the risk posed to individuals is too high. No security system is fail-safe and we should think carefully before collecting any type of data and ask first whether it is necessary and potentially of public value. There are other forms of discriminatory data gathering which should be eliminated outright. This includes carceral technology to assist predictive policing, which Ruha Benjamin in Race after Technology has called to be abolished

– [[Platform socialism]]

Resources§

• Unlocking the value in data as a commons | Nesta
• Data Commons & Data Trusts. What they are and how they relate | by Anouk Ruha…

• open social graph

• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109932409487184349 pull

• [[neil@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@neil/109831494827967440 pull

David Bollier, P2P Models interview on digital commons§

URL : https://p2pmodels.eu/digital-contexts-commons-adequate-attention/

[[David Bollier]].

many people still approach [[digital Commons]] from the resource perspective, and so they don’t adequately address the social dimension

a lot of open platforms are conflated with a Commons, meaning if it is an open platform, there is an assumption that anybody should be able to use it, without paying attention to the social dimensions of stewardship and curation of a Commons

A Commons doesn’t take care of itself, but that’s essentially what the idea of an “open platform” presumes.

• an [[article]].
  • [[10 design principles for governing the commons]]
  • #go https://www.lifewithalacrity.com/article/10-design-principles-for-governing-the-commons/
  • [[DEFINE BOUNDARIES]]: There are clearly defined boundaries around the common resources of a system from the larger environment.
  • [[DEFINE LEGITIMATE USERS]]: There is a clearly defined community of legitimate users of those resources.
  • [[ADAPT LOCALLY]]: Rules for use of resources are adapted to local needs and conditions.
  • [[DECIDE INCLUSIVELY]]: Those using resources are included in decision making.
  • [[MONITOR EFFECTIVELY]]: There exists effective monitoring of the system by accountable monitors.
  • [[SHARE KNOWLEDGE]]: All parties share knowledge of local conditions of the system.
  • [[HOLD ACCOUNTABLE]]: Have graduated sanctions for those who violate community rules.
  • [[OFFER MEDIATION]]: Offer cheap and easy access to confict resolution.
  • [[GOVERN LOCALLY]]: Community self-determination is recognized by higher-level authorities.
  • [[DON’T EXTERNALIZE COSTS]]: Resource systems embedded in other resource systems are organized in and accountable to multiple layers of nested communities.

digital commons§

• a [[place]].
  • #pull [[knowledge commons]] [[digital]] [[commons]]
    • the [[internet]] provides us with the ability to construct an essentially infinite number of [[digital commons]] by definition as long and as far as you allow (that is, do not encumber) [[copying]].
      • this is why I am against [[copyright]] in general.
      • whatever can be copied for free can be freely shared and is thus trivially part of the [[commons]].
• a [[list]].
  • (you can #push examples here or write them in the [[stoa]] below).
  • an [[agora]].

• [[commons]]
  • [[free libre open source software]]
  • [[tragedy of the digital commons]]
  • [[open course]] [[open course ware]]
  • [[pull]] [[governing the commons]]

Digital commons§

[[Digital]] [[Commons]].

Things like information, data, culture and knowledge which are maintained as a shared resource by an online community.

For example, projects in the area of:

• [[free software]]
• [[free culture]]
• [[open data]]
• [[open access]]

Wikipedia is a well known one.

What is a digital commons?§

Digital commons are a subset of the commons, where the resources are data, information, culture and knowledge which are created and/or maintained online.

– [[dulongderosnay2020: Digital commons]]

The digital [[commons]] are a form of commons involving the distribution and communal ownership of informational resources and technology.

– Digital commons (economics) - Wikipedia

Distribution and communal ownership of informational resources and technology. That could cover a lot of stuff…

Resources are typically designed to be used by the community by which they are created.

– Digital commons (economics) - Wikipedia

^ that’s true of commons in general, but seems like it wouldn’t need to be quite the case for digital commons… in that they are easier to be used beyond the community that creates them.

The distinction between digital commons and other digital resources is that the community of people building them can intervene in the governing of their interaction processes and of their shared resources.

– Digital commons (economics) - Wikipedia

Digital commons is a (the?) commons centred on digital media and digital devices - might include many kinds of automation, guidance of material systems, provisioning and transportation of material goods etc. bringing a major focus on the digital capability and literacy of the commoners. It’s a material commons of code, devices, media, enabled and stewarded by cultural capability (aka skill)

– [[Mike Hales]] https://social.coop/@mike_hales/107430505867111451

Examples of digital commons§

The [[free software]] movement in general is called a digital commons (by Wikipedia at least).

Examples of the digital commons include wikis, open-source software, and open-source licensing.

– Digital commons (economics) - Wikipedia

[[Free culture]], [[public domain]], [[open data]] and [[open access]] are mentioned in [[dulongderosnay2020: Digital commons]].

This research publication from [[IPPR]] seems to focus on data as a digital commons:

It requires a broader understanding of data as a public resource, but one of an exceptional kind: that there is space for market-based approaches, and for some direct state regulation, but that data will increasingly often require the creation of new forms of ownership and control, out of the hands of either market or state institutions.

– [[Creating a digital commons]]

Commoning a digital commons§

Social life of a digital commons§

Stewarding a digital commons§

How would you protect it from enclosure? ([[Enclosure of the digital commons]]) i.e. how would you [[Actively Thwart Enclosure & Cooptation]] in a digital commons?

Typically, information created in the digital commons is designed to stay in the digital commons by using various forms of licensing, including the [[GNU General Public License]] and various [[Creative Commons]] licenses.

Provisioning a digital commons§

Compared to knowledge commons§

I wonder how digital commons compares to [[knowledge commons]]? Perhaps just that some knowledge commons are digital commmons, and some digital commons are knowledge commons?

Issues§

It is also worth noting that a commons can get the mix of collective control and individualism wrong. A group may exert a suffocating presence on the individual, or on certain types of individuals. Patriarchy is a problem in many subsistence and digital commons despite women’s significant role in commoning.

– [[Free, Fair and Alive]]

[[Tragedy of the digital commons]]? (there’s a paper on it, not read it though)

• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107532443209089680 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107583656717054487 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107587928358466504 pull

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1476310212529332225 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1479588299434086400 pull
• [[jayu__]] https://twitter.com/_jayu___/status/1479588378236657665 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1479860625824178179 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1470527164827250689 pull

dulongderosnay2020: Digital commons§

URL : https://policyreview.info/concepts/digital-commons

This article presents the history of the movement of the digital commons, from free software, free culture, and public domain works, to open data and open access to science. It then analyses its foundational dimensions (licensing, authorship, peer production, governance) and finally studies newer forms of the digital commons, urban democratic participation and data commons.

They are shared in ways that avoid their enclosure and allow everyone to access and build upon them.

The notion of the digital commons lies at the heart of digital rights, the political fight to expand, rather than restrict, access to information, culture and knowledge (Kapczynski & Krikorian, 2010).

Unlike tangible commons (such as urban gardens, forests or meadows), the digital commons (such as free software or Wikipedia) are not affected by overuse or material exclusivity. However, their existence can still be threatened by undersupply, inadequate legal frameworks, pollution, lack of quality or findability.

^ I think this misses though that the time, energy and health of the community can be overused/drained. Does the product of the commons == the commons itself?

We highlight how fundamental an alternative the commons can be, particularly in relation with current issues of capitalism with data-driven surveillance, platform monopolies and the increasingly authoritarian orientation of even many democracies.

Digital commons rely on open licensing rules and we study legal models preserving sharing and access, which constitute the originality of the digital commons compared to standard copyright used by firms focusing on exclusivity. We then study cultural models, which have an impact on authorship and creativity, leading to original economic peer production models, the third pil- lar of commons studied holistically. Last, these three holistic dimensions depend on governance by communities, presented as a fourth overarching dimension.

So B&H talk of social life, governance and provisioning of commons. The authors here are also adding in legal - not sure why that doesn’t fit under governance, we shall see.

These are all necessary to rebalance the relation between individual and collective rights, whereas both singular and collective need to be understood, as [Donna Haraway] calls it, “entities-in-assemblages”.

The new paradigm of producing informational goods as commons emerged first in the field of software development.

As FLOSS (Free, Libre and Open Source Software) projects grew and proliferated, it established the practical example that complex, knowledge-intensive informational resources can be managed as commons in Ostrom’s sense (Schweik & English, 2012) and that these are stable and reliable over long periods of time capable of competing directly with market-based commodity production (Weber, 2004).

While there are many commonalities between digital and the tangible commons, one of the fundamental differences between them is that in the former, the resource is by and large, non-rival. There is no danger of overuse.

^ I’d probably contest that a little again - there’s maybe no danger of overuse, but there’s definitely danger of burnout.

Everyone who adheres to the relevant governing rules, for example, the conditions of use prescribed in a licence, is allowed to use the resource and thus can be regarded as part of the community at large. In other words, producers and users are not separated.

interesting, so producers and users are all part of the same commons.

Conventionally, liberal theory conceived creativity as the capacity of the individual exercised in isolation by an unusually gifted person, the (white male) genius (Woodmansee, 1984). Many cultural tropes, from the writer struggling with the empty page, to the artist secluded in her atelier, and the inventor with his personal “eureka” moment, reflect and popularise this notion. This model of the creative process underlies copyright and justifies to attribute a creative work to a single person and afford him (and only much later, her) sole ownership of the work, which is seen as an “original”, that this, as something new, a beginning without precedence. While this notion has long dominated the cultural field and the public imagination, for complex knowledge-intensive goods this was never seen as adequate. In 1942, Robert K. Merton (1973, p. 273), defined “communism”, understood as “common ownership of goods [as] a[n] … integral element of the scientific ethos”, because “the substantive findings of science are a product of social collaboration and are assigned to the community”.

Since the late 1960s, postmodern literary theories, using notions such as [[intertextuality]], started to question ideas of individual authorship and reveal the collective dimension of literary work (Woodmansee, 1992). While these theories remained confined to relatively specialised audiences for a long time, they started to resonate with the experience within digital networks (Turkle, 1995) where collaboration and transformation of third party works were technically supported and culturally accepted. The free software movement started out as a cultural revolt in which the encroachment of intellectual property was seen as threatening long-held values of community and cooperation (Stallman, 1985). Within networked culture more implicitly and the commons more explicitly, creativity is understood less as the faculty of an individual genius, and more as a balance between individual contribution and collective enablement (Stalder, 2018). This points to a more comprehensive transformation of subjectivity, away from standard liberal notions starting from, and centering around, the individual—separate from his or her environment—to different configurations that some started to call “networked individualism” through which the collective (the network) and the singular (the individual) are co-constituted (Nyiri, 2005; Rainie & Wellman, 2012). All of this rubs against notions of individual authorship which are deeply rooted in Western countries, both legally and culturally. It indicates the depths of the challenge that the commons poses to the framework of Western modernity.

^ this whole section is a huge ‘yes’ moment. should probably break it up but it works as one chunk really…

However, without strong approaches to govern the appropriation from the digital commons, it is not certain that large companies benefiting from it will contribute back. The sharing economy, while initially also working with notions of non-market exchange (for example, couch-surfing used to be a non-commercial community platform (Schöpf, 2015)), has been overtaken by capitalist approaches redefined “sharing” as short-term rental of granular resources (such as a room in an apartment, a taxi ride and so on) and has lost all relation to the commons (Slee, 2015).

Eight design principles for successful commons§

• Clearly defined the group boundaries (and effective exclusion of external un-entitled parties) and the contents of the common pool resource;

• The appropriation and provision of common resources that are adapted to local conditions;

• Collective-choice arrangements that allow most resource appropriators to participate in the decision-making process;

• Effective monitoring by monitors who are part of or accountable to the appropriators;

• A scale of graduated sanctions for resource appropriators who violate community rules;

• Mechanisms of conflict resolution that are cheap and of easy access;

• Self-determination of the community recognized by higher-level authorities; and

• In the case of larger common-pool resources, organization in the form of multiple layers of nested enterprises, with small local CPRs at the base level.

• Elinor Ostrom - Wikipedia

enclosure of the commons§

between 1760 and 1870, about 7 million acres (about one sixth the area of England) were changed, by some 4,000 acts of parliament, from common land to enclosed land.

– What the battle for Freeman’s Wood says about the future of our common land |…

[[Commons]].

In England, over the course of a few centuries, lands that were held and cared for by communities in common were expropriated, fenced in and enclosed as private property to be owned by a small elite. This process of transforming shared interdependent ecologies into separate, scarce and privately owned ‘things’ was encoded into property law and violently exported across the world in a continuous and unceasing process of colonisation.

– [[Seeding the Wild]]

enclosure of the data commons§

If our collective data is a [[data commons]], then the big tech silos have enclosed it, taking our data and not allowing access to it.

Enclosure of the digital commons§

[[Enclosure]] of the [[Digital commons]].

See [[Internet for the People]]; [[Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism?]].

How to [[Actively Thwart Enclosure & Cooptation]] of the digital commons?

Typically, information created in the digital commons is designed to stay in the digital commons by using various forms of licensing, including the [[GNU General Public License]] and various [[Creative Commons]] licenses.

– Digital commons (economics) - Wikipedia

expropriation of the commons§

term from [[free, fair, and alive]]

a term used to describe cooperative activities that resemble commoning but that are in fact hosted or governed by noncommoners such as businesses, state entities, or investment group. A prominent example is Facebook, a closed, proprietary network platform for sharing that exploits user data for private business purposes. Digital platforms like Airbnb and Uber purport to promote sharing, but in fact are transaction-based, capital-driven enterprises, not commons. Contractual partnerships that involve reciprocal benefits such as patent pools among drug makers are another instance of faux commons. They are chiefly organized for specific market purposes, and not as long-term covenants among participants to share stewardship responsibilities and benefits over time. These distinctions matter 80 Free, Fair and Alive because businesses enterprises are often eager to disguise their mercantile interests and claim democratic legitimacy by pretending to be about sharing, community, and the common good, i.e., to “commonswash.”

• [[agora]] https://botsin.space/@agora/109060759876508557 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109060846803013813 pull
• [[agora]] https://botsin.space/@agora/109061284874323663 pull

Food commons§

[[Food]] [[commons]]

• #push [[FKC]]
  • #pull [[free]] [[knowledge]] [[commons]]

governance commons§

governing a commons§

• a [[book]]
  • by [[elinor ostrom]]
  • [[1990]]
  • [[wp]] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-521-40599-7 pull
  • [[hypothesis]] https://via.hypothes.is/https://www.actu-environnement.com/media/pdf/ostrom_1990.pdf
    • [[go]] [[hypothesis]]
  • [[google books]] https://books.google.ch/books?id=4xg6oUobMz4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=isbn:9780521405997&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiU5ZfmhczwAhWEuaQKHVnnCEwQ6AEwAHoECAAQAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1401146586013618183 pull https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1400884449949126663 pull

• [[book]]
  • [[author]] [[elinor ostrom]]
  • [[common pool resource]] [[cpr]]
  • [[tragedy of the commons]]
  • [[prisoner’s dilemma]]
  • [[collective action]]
  • [[leviathan]]
  • [[new institutionalism]]
  • [[self-organized governance]]

Governing the Commons§

[[Elinor Ostrom]].

• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/111993980398590154 pull

• [[2024-02-25 20:22:03+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] (link):

  • #10 design principles for [[governing the commons]]: https://www.lifewithalacrity.com/article/10-design-principles-for-governing-the-commons/

Governing the Information Commons§

An : [[article]]

Found at : https://www.glizzan.com/2020/03/04/governing-the-information-commons.html

norms around ownership are so taken for granted that even projects expressly devoted to empowering users by wrestling ownership and control from big companies still encode these norms

Nice article about building [[governance]] layers into platforms. Following [[Elinor Ostrom]]‘s [[8 principles for managing a commons]]. The part that resonated most for me on first reading is the need to understand the many patterns of governance that exist. From there we can move from the simple defaulting to [[private property]] based models.

One vital thing that all of us can do is learn more about governance. The world is full to bursting with varieties of governance systems for us to learn about - whether it’s the [[sortition]]-based democracy of ancient Athens or [[consensus]] based models used by Quakers or the many, many forms of governance which are used by communities that have been marginalized by dominant forces in our society.

By learning about these systems, we not only open our minds to new possibilities, we also learn to see patterns in what kinds of structures work in which situations.

People in power want us to be overwhelmed by complexity and uncertainty, so we’ll cede our right to self-determination to them. But we can learn to be patient with complexity and comfortable with uncertainty. They want us to be frustrated with the messiness of democracy and with each other, but we can learn to understand, support, and forgive each other.

Hacking for the Commons§

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/hackingforthecommons/479130288

How does linking digital gardens facilitate a richer commons?§

This shift from the standard wiki to a form of writing based on “one person, one wiki, in a federated environment,” may sound like a step backward from the Wikipedia style of open collaboration. But in fact the effect is quite the opposite: giving online platforms to individual voices while bringing them together into a shared neighborhood of wikis results in a richer, more robust commons.

– [[A Platform Designed for Collaboration: Federated Wiki]]

Why?

I guess first of all, what is the commons that is being produced?

A commons is a combination of social, political (governance) and economic (provisioning) factors. A collection of digital gardens are a knowledge commons.

But what is it’s value? There is an assumption that the content of the gardens together produces something of value. I don’t think this can just be assumed. If you’ve just a bunch of individual gardens linked together with no purpose, there’s not necessarily a benefit.

I guess the assumption is that there’s some intention behind the conjoined wikis - i.e. they are all working together on some topic. So yeah one benefit comes from if it’s a group of gardens with a shared purpose, I think.

But in the absence of purpose I think another benefit is that it faciliates going on a [[dérive]] drift and learning about unexpected new things.

How to actively thwart enclosure and cooptation of the digital commons§

How to [[Actively Thwart Enclosure & Cooptation]] of the [[digital commons]]? How to avoid [[Enclosure of the digital commons]]?

Legal hacks? [[Beating the bounds]]? Trusts? State laws?

Typically, information created in the digital commons is designed to stay in the digital commons by using various forms of licensing, including the [[GNU General Public License]] and various [[Creative Commons]] licenses.

– Digital commons (economics) - Wikipedia

I like the commons§

[[I like]] the [[Commons]].

Because…

• [[Commoning represents a profound challenge to capitalism]]
• [[A commons is a politics of belonging]]
• [[The commons enables people to enjoy freedom without repressing others]]
• [[The commons enables people to enact fairness without bureaucratic control]]
• [[The commons enables people to foster togetherness without compulsion]]
• [[The commons enables people to assert sovereignty without nationalism]]

Epistemic status§

Type : [[feeling]]

Strength : 9

How well I could explain why : 6

• [[2024-08-30T08:27:03.439Z]] @[[flancia.org]]: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:xu4fhdxwmrptiwfvq5ymbkxx/post/3l2wdhll5dz2p pull

Instant Commons§

• [[go]] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/InstantCommons pull
• Could be incorporated into the [[agora]]?
• Could be an example for [[agora protocol]].

international journal of the commons§

• a [[journal]].
  • [[go]] https://www.thecommonsjournal.org/articles/abstract/10.18352/ijc.76/
  • [[traditions and trends in the study of the commons]] https://www.thecommonsjournal.org/articles/abstract/10.18352/ijc.76/

Is Open Street Map a data commons?§

Is [[Open Street Map]] a [[data commons]]?

It uses the [[Open Data Commons Open Database License]], so that’s probably a hint. Although that license feels more about open data than full-on commoning.

So what does it mean to be a data commons?

"data of the people, by the people, for the people" (https://datacommons.barcelona/en/) "software platform along with a governance framework […] allow a community to manage, analyze and share its data" (3 Key Steps to a Successful Data Commons - data.org)

Seems like OSM does tick those boxes.

• data of the people - it’s a map of the things in the world of people
• data by the people - it’s collected by people
• data for the people - it’s openly licensed to allow anyone to use it

I’m not completely sure what the governance of it is. But it looks pretty open and community-oriented from what I’ve seen of various wikis and forums that I’ve stumbled on.

It has many excellent software platforms for editing and viewing the data.

So yeah, from my limited knowledge, it certainly feels like a data commons.

How would the [[Spheres of commoning]] apply? Social life, governance, and provisioning?

• a [[thing]].
  • [[list]]
    • [[pull]]] [[knowledge]] [[commons]]
  • [[go]] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_commons pull
  • [[pull]] [[understanding knowledge as a commons]]
  • [[flancia]] is the revolution of an altruist [[knowledge commons]]
    • [[pull]] [[towards a knowledge commons]]

• [[commons]]
  • [[collective ownership]]
  • [[collective intelligence]]
  • [[intellectual property]]
  • [[information resource]]
  • [[open science]]
  • [[noosphere]]
  • [[pull]] [[governing the commons]]

knowledge commons§

"the mutualization of productive knowledge"

The term "knowledge commons" refers to information, data, and content that is collectively owned and managed by a community of users, particularly over the Internet.

– Knowledge commons - Wikipedia

Examples of knowledge commons§

The knowledge commons is a model for a number of domains, including Open Educational Resources such as the MIT OpenCourseWare, free digital media such as Wikipedia,[4] Creative Commons –licensed art, open-source research,[5] and open scientific collections such as the Public Library of Science or the Science Commons, free software and Open Design.[6][7]

– Knowledge commons - Wikipedia

• [[Open Educational Resources]]
• [[Wikipedia]]
• [[Creative Commons]]
• [[Public Library of Science]]
• [[Science Commons]]
• [[Free software]]

Knowledge commoning§

Once again, the promise of a knowledge commons is best made evident in the disagreements and difficulties in determining who and how it should be managed

– [[Undoing Optimization: Civic Action in Smart Cities]]

Knowledge commons is a misnomer bcos there is no such thing as knowledge. (!!)

What there IS/ARE is/are practices of knowing, communicating and organising.

So a ‘knowledge commons’ is a commons of literacy and (collective) labour power, thro which commoners are able to capably understand and organise their practical life as a commons, in a world of commons. It’s a cultural commons.

– [[Mike Hales]] https://social.coop/@mike_hales/107430510590782176

Resources§

• [[Understanding Knowledge as a Commons]]

• [[neil]] https://social.coop/@neil/107429178281584183 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107531538499969008 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107547546947089066 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107690492202509810 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108227324005008281 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108296429121659574 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108301778167749031 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108330851342898326 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108419338050863652 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108426305621183937 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108963058904226281 pull
• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109369929141073531 pull
• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109644088096408747 pull

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1476252351879131141 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1476310212529332225 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1477277098372997127 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1482438193588936705 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1486425635295748109 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1502664697920819203 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1520417096840138753 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1520782972294770689 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1523395562649026560 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1525205390987866112 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1525548230808850433 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1527408508072775694 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1527957723609972736 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1527968077924777984 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1533071193888149505 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1552395293785726976 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1552398182751129600 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1560992279074152448 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1567870192432152576 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/{‘id’: ‘773144670507499521’, ‘name’: ‘The Agora is a Federated Knowledge Commons’, ‘username’: ‘flancian’}/status/1552398182751129600
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/{‘id’: ‘773144670507499521’, ‘name’: ‘The Agora is a Federated Knowledge Commons’, ‘username’: ‘flancian’}/status/1552395293785726976
• [[2023-01-06 20:12:00+00:00]] @[[flancian]]: https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1611455564113911810 pull

• [[2022-07-07 21:47:55]] [[@flancian:matrix.org]] (link):
  • the [[knowledge commons]] in particular
• [[2022-11-25 22:17:54]] [[@flancian:matrix.org]] (link):
  • the idea is to reduce friction to cooperation in a [[knowledge commons]]
• [[2023-02-17 20:32:48]] [[@flancian:matrix.org]] (link):
  • the question is: once we have markdown and git as tools for building a [[knowledge commons]], how can we manifest the base that allows it to sustain itself?

• [[2022-11-19 10:11:18+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109369929141073531:

  • @strypey @icedquinn ahoy there! thank you for your interest :)

    anagora.org is the reference instance for the Agora software/service I’ve been writing for the last two years. It is a distributed [[knowledge commons]]. In practice it works as an aggregator of notes and posts coming from different sources: digital gardens and the [[fediverse]] currently.

    e.g. when you use a wikilink or hashtag near @agora, an Agora will link and optionally save your post :)

• [[2023-01-06 20:13:32+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109644088096408747:

  • RT @flancian
    The Agora is an implementation of a [[knowledge commons]]. It lets communities agree on [[sources of truth]], and in ways to perform entity resolution and intent handling.

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/{‘id’: ‘773144670507499521’, ‘name’: ‘The Agora is a Federated Knowledge Commons’, ‘username’: ‘flancian’}/status/1552398182751129600
  • @bmann @jessmartin @BillSeitz @RobertHaisfield @csageland @balOShere @JoelChan86 @TiddlyWiki @an_agora @socialroots_io "[[scaling synthesis]] in a [[knowledge commons]]" :)- [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/{‘id’: ‘773144670507499521’, ‘name’: ‘The Agora is a Federated Knowledge Commons’, ‘username’: ‘flancian’}/status/1552395293785726976
  • @BillSeitz @bmann @jessmartin @RobertHaisfield @csageland @balOShere @JoelChan86 @TiddlyWiki @an_agora @socialroots_io What we need is a [[knowledge commons]]. The commons is based on a shared set of values. A commons may define rules for self-governance. Rules for cooperation can be attached to working spaces, which in an [[agora]] all map to [[wikilinks]] resolved in a [[federated]] system.- [[2023-01-06 20:12:00+00:00]] @[[flancian]]: https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1611455564113911810 pull

RT @flancian: The Agora is an implementation of a [[knowledge commons]]. It lets communities agree on [[sources of truth]], and in ways to…

• [[2023-09-27 22:58:17]] [[@flancian:matrix.org]] (link):
  • I’ve been thinking about the [[moderation commons]] as it could be

Most libre software projects are entirely lacking in the principles of governing a commons§

Most [[libre software]] projects are entirely lacking in the principles of [[governing a commons]].

From [[Nathan Schneider on Cooperatives and Digital Governance]].

See also: [[We cannot depend upon structures to do the work of culture]].

• [[tanepiper@tane.codes]] https://tane.codes/@tanepiper/110536351540516808 pull

• [[tanepiper@tane.codes]] https://tane.codes/@tanepiper/110736111024201161 pull

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1473029376522567683 pull

Provisioning Through Commons§

Part of the [[Triad of Commoning]].

Patterns§

• Make & Use Together
• Support Care & Decommodified Work
• Share the Risks of Provisioning
• Contribute & Share
• Pool, Cap & Divide Up
• Pool, Cap & Mutualize
• Trade with Price Sovereignty
• [[Use Convivial Tools]]
• Rely on Distributed Structures
• Creatively Adapt & Renew

Public-civic collaboration, coop incubators and stewarding digital infrastructure as a commons§

https://forum.meet.coop/t/session-8-discussion/1003

Sophie Bloemen from [[Commons Network]].

[[Coop incubators]]. [[NGI Forward]]. [[Generative interoperability]].

Individual -> community Extractive -> regenerative Competition -> cooperation Linear -> ecosystem

Commons / cooperative economy.

Need governmental support at all levels.

[[Public-collective partnerships]]

restoring the commons§

• [[flaneur@merveilles.town]] https://merveilles.town/@flaneur/110164685696134391 pull

• [[2023-04-08 18:48:21+00:00]] @[[flaneur@merveilles.town]] (link):

  • I don’t know who has the position currently, but I sort of feel my ideal job outside of Google would be CEO of Mozilla. I’d try to steer the ship in the direction of the loving-kind [[Revolution of the Commons]].

Science Commons§

Silence Is a Commons§

• [[go]] https://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/5962/Silence%20is%20a%20Commons.html

Silke Helfrich & David Bollier: What Is The Commons?§

URL : https://voices-of-the-commons.sounder.fm/episode/silke-helfrich-david-bollier-what-is-the-common

Publisher : [[Guerrilla Media Collective]]

Guests : [[David Bollier]], [[Silke Helfrich]]

Topics : [[Commons]]

Nice little podcast on the commons. What is it, what are [[Patterns of Commoning]], how do you inculcate a commoner mindset.

• [[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109769321269177658 pull

• [[2023-01-28 23:01:58+00:00]] @[[flancian@social.coop]] https://social.coop/@flancian/109769321269177658:

  • I will now process registrations and do moderation for #SocialCoop, work in the [[Social Commons]] :)

Social digital commons§

Social Transformation Through ‘The Commons’§

A : [[podcast]]

URL :

https://thenextsystem.org/learn/stories/episode-17-social-transformation-through-commons-w-david-bollier

Series : [[The Next System]]

Featuring : [[David Bollier]]

Great interview with David Bollier on the [[commons]] (natural, urban, digital), [[commoning]], re-recognising the value in things that sit outside of market economics and exchange value. (Contains the bombshell that apparently 20% of the human genome has already been enclosed and patented. WTF?!)

Sovereign Accountable Commons§

we often see DAOs fall short with their aversion to the messy parts of human organizing and community building.

– DAOs: Why Sovereign Accountable Commons Might Be Better - Holochain Blog

Sovereignty for the Commons§

A : [[podcast]]

URL : https://theblockchainsocialist.buzzsprout.com/903769/10423365-ccg-chronicles-7-sovereignty-for-the-commons

[[Sovereignty]] for the [[Commons]].

Sarah Manski.

~00:06:03 Socio technical imaginary where you can imagine future you want and then build it.

~00:09:06 Sovereignty. In various spaces, nation, city, workplace, etc. Digital platforms usually pretty authoritarian.

~00:13:50 [[Gramsci]], [[interregnum]].

~00:32:25 I like her personal definition of [[cryptocommons]]: distributing wealth of planet to all people of planet using technology.

• #pull https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSYDn9CoWlS5MOtgdK4q2etAVDf_IXgDNJE9CKzQ73SGVmSDY5Vd0Azakw9s6ogR7LYADNxG2j-F9Na/pub pull

The Internet as a Super-Commons§

URL : http://www.bollier.org/week-9-internet-super-commons

Featuring : [[David Bollier]]

Podcast about the internet, the web, and [[Libre software]] from the perspective of the [[Commons]].

From 2010 so some thinking might have moved on. But still a good history.

There’s certainly more to be added now to ideas from e.g. [[The Cathedral and the Bazaar]]. For example [[Post-Open Source]].

[[Architecture is politics]]. [[Anarchism Triumphant: Free Software and the Death of Copyright]].

The Nested-I and Ubuntu Rationality: The Relational Ontology of the Commons§

A section in the book [[Free, Fair and Alive]].

Commoning has a different orientation to the world because its actions are based on a deep relationality of everything. It is a world of dense interpersonal connections and interdependencies. Actions are not simply matters of direct cause-and-effect between the most proximate, visible actors; they stem from a pulsating web of culture and myriad relationships through which new things emerge.

[[Relational ontology]]. [[Ubuntu Rationality]]. [[Nested-I]].

the tragedy of the commons§

Towards a Knowledge Commons§

• a [[draft]].
  • [[pull]] [[commons]] [[knowledge commons]] [[digital commons]] [[counter anti disintermediation]]

As we enter [[2022]], I believe we are in a better position than ever to accomplish many great things as a society — and this goes for many definitions of society, up to and including perhaps the most important, that as society as the group of all humans¹. In particular I believe that we are entering a [[renaissance of the internet]] that will enable it to deliver on the promise of a distributed commons that stalled somewhat in the last fifteen years due to the success of [[anti disintermediation]] as effected by interested parties. But hopefully you won’t have to take my belief at face value; let me try to show you why I think what I think.

Consider the potential of the [[commons]] as illustrated by [[Free, Fair and Alive]] and the work of [[Elinor Ostrom]], taken in the spirit of a alternate timeline [[solarpunk]] [[Friedrich Engels]]: [[utopian socialism]] and the internet (seen through the lens of the [[theory of the commons]]) really go together at least as well as a horse and carriage. Engels came up with the carriage (the plan, the blueprint) but didn’t have the horse to drive his vision effectively. This is my vision: the internet is the horse that can drive the [[revolution]] we need, the machine that Engels and [[Protopians]] before and after him were missing, and it is more than just machine, because it is endowed with [[higher consciousness]].

But let me backtrack a bit. Let me tell you why I believe both us and the internet we’ve built are ready for this.

On distributed thought§

Thought is a [[non rivalrous good]]; thought can be efficiently encoded digitally; the internet makes a [[digital commons]] both tractable and [[peer governable]]. That’s the heart of the matter.

We have lived with [[wikis]] for thirty years now, and [[wikipedia]] is clearly one of humanity’s most important projects, but for some reason wikis aren’t a big part of many people’s lives; in some ways we haven’t yet seen them come to fruition. As of the beginning of the [[2020s]], though, personal knowledge management systems like [[tiddlywiki]], [[org mode]], [[roam]], [[logseq]], [[obsidian]], [[athens]] and the like have come to prominence.

Tragedy of the Commons§

[[Garrett Hardin]].

Hardin’s “tragedy” thesis ought to be renamed “The Tragedy of Unmanaged, Laissez-Faire, Commons-Pool Resources with Easy Access for Non-Communicating, Self-Interested Individuals.”

– [[Free, Fair and Alive]]

Even Hardin (1994) eventually acknowledged that the tragedy of the commons only applies to “unmanaged commons”, by which he meant simple open access resources with no use constraints. Of course, such resources are not commons, because it is the shared management that makes a resource a commons.

– [[dulongderosnay2020: Digital commons]]

[[Fat-tailed sheep]] in Afghanistan. The “tragedy of the commons” is one way of accounting for [[overexploitation]] - [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fat_tailed_sheep,_Afghanistan,_1976.jpg wikimedia]

The tragedy of the commons describes a situation in economic science when individual users, who have open access to a resource unhampered by shared social structures or formal rules that govern access and use, act independently according to their [[selfishness]] and, contrary to the common good of all users, cause depletion of the resource through their uncoordinated action. The concept originated in an essay written in 1833 by the British economist [[William Forster Lloyd]], who used a hypothetical example of the effects of unregulated grazing on [[common land]] (also known as a "common") in [[Great Britain]] and [[Ireland]]. The concept became widely known as the "tragedy of the commons" over a century later after an article written by [[Garrett Hardin]] in 1968 - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons wikipedia]

Although open-access resource systems may collapse due to overuse (such as in [[over-fishing]]), many examples have existed and still do exist where members of a community with regulated access to a common resource co-operate to exploit those resources prudently without collapse or even creating [[Perfect Order]]. [[Elinor Ostrom]] was awarded the 2009 [[Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences]] for demonstrating exactly this concept in her book ”Governing the Commons”, which included examples of how local communities were able to do this without top-down regulations or [[privatization]].

In a modern economic context, "[[commons]]" is taken to mean any open-access and unregulated resource such as the [[Carbon dioxide#In the Earth’s atmosphere]], [[Great Pacific garbage patch]], [[river]]s, ocean [[fish stocks]], or even an office refrigerator. In a legal context, it is a type of property that is neither private nor public, but rather held jointly by the members of a community, who govern access and use through social structures, traditions, or formal rules.

The term is used also in [[environmental science]]. The "tragedy of the commons" is often cited in connection with [[sustainable development]], meshing economic growth and environmental protection, as well as in the [[Global warming controversy]]. It has also been used in analyzing behavior in the fields of [[economics]], [[evolutionary psychology]], [[anthropology]], [[game theory]], [[politics]], [[taxation]], and [[sociology]].

Sections§

See also§

• [[Bounded rationality]]
• [[Dutch disease]]
• [[Externality]]
• [[Credentialism and educational inflation]]
• [[International Association for the Study of the Commons]]
• [[Nash equilibrium]]
• [[Race to the bottom]]
• [[Panic buying]]
• [[Parasitism (social offense)]]
• [[Prisoner’s dilemma]]
• [[Social reputation in fiction]]
• [[Social trap]]
• [[Somebody else’s problem]]
• [[Stone Soup]]
• [[Tragedy of the anticommons]]
• [[Tyranny of small decisions]]
• [[Unscrupulous diner’s dilemma]]
• [[The Evolution of Cooperation]]
• [[Unintended consequences]]
• [[Volunteer’s dilemma]]
• [[Overfishing]]
• [[Shark finning]]
• [[Pacific bluefin tuna]]

• [[2022-12-04 17:19:17+00:00]] @[[flancian]]: https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1599453298435784713 pull

• [[2022-12-04 17:19:17+00:00]] @[[flancian]]: https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1599453298435784713 pull

RT @flancian@social.coop smallcircles ocdtrekkie jonny hmiron alcinnz an [[agora]] tries to give communities the tools to solve the so called [[tragedy of the commons]] — should a tool/device like this be proposed to a standards body? https://t.co/RIYBCdX8g5

Tragedy of the digital commons§

URL : https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10676-004-2895-2

• a [[book]]
  • #apa Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (2019). Understanding knowledge as a commons—From theory to practice. The MIT Press.
    • by [[charlotte hess]] and [[elinor ostrom]]
      • goodreads has this under [[charlotte hess]]
      • only 3.7 :(
      • described as a loose collection of essays; might make sense to take notes per-chapter
    • [[go]] https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/understanding-knowledge-commons
    • [[hypothesis]] https://via.hypothes.is/www.wtf.tw/ref/hess_ostrom_2007.pdf
    • [[pull]] [[knowledge commons]]
    • [[es]] [[los bienes comunes del conocimiento]]

Understanding Knowledge as a Commons§

A : [[book]]

URL : https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/understanding-knowledge-commons

• [[2022-08-28 18:22:16]] [[@flancian:matrix.org]] (link):
  • [[understanding knowledge as a commons]]

Urban density is a tragedy of the commons§

Metadata§

• Author: [[Devon Zuegel]]
• Full Title: Urban density is a tragedy of the commons
• Category: #articles
• URL: https://devonzuegel.com/post/urban-density-is-a-tragedy-of-the-commons

Highlights§

• Put another way, each of us tends to choose a larger homes than we want our neighbors to choose. Of course most people can’t afford a mansion, but they will always want as much space as they can get. Financial constraints keep this dynamic from spiraling out of control, but at the margin there’s constant pressure towards sprawl. The result: an undersupply of urban neighborhoods.

What is the relationship between cooperatives and the commons?§

They are both related to self-ownership and self-governance.

[[Cooperatives]] are more structure, [[commons]] is more culture?

Coops need a culture of commoning. [[Coops can turn in to bad actors if there is no culture of commoning]].

Coops can be stewards of the commons.

You might wonder why cooperatives are often cited as examples of the commons when in fact many of them seem to produce for and sustain themselves entirely from the market.

– [[Free, Fair and Alive]]

The reason is that many cooperatives have not found cultural means to Keep Commons & Commerce Distinct.

– [[Free, Fair and Alive]]

Resources§

• [[Nathan Schneider - Cooperatives, the Commons and Ownership]]

What’s the difference between digital commons and knowledge commons?§

My minimal bit of digging in to descriptions of both digital commons and knowledge commons both tended to mention the same kind of projects, e.g. free software projects, open access projects, Wikipedia, etc… probably knowledge commons examples just happened to list ones that were facilitated by the digital.

Latter ([[knowledge commons]]) has nothing necessarily to do with the digital - only contingently, in the present historical epoch of digitally mediated hegemony, digital media and the participation in power circuits of a Professional-managerial class.

Former ([[digital commons]]) has nothing especially to do with literacy, organising capacity & labour power - except that organising the digital - like organising anything that is even slightly complex - pivots on collective labour power.

– [[Mike Hales]] https://social.coop/@mike_hales/107430540493147092

• [[ctc@mastodon.me.uk]] https://mastodon.me.uk/@ctc/109879386812707463 pull

• [[ctc@mastodon.me.uk]] https://mastodon.me.uk/@ctc/109885049111140709 pull

• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/107955369461432280 pull
• [[j0lms]] https://mastodon.social/@j0lms/107955582006122386 pull
• [[flancian]] https://social.coop/@flancian/108011862295349437 pull

• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1503377308849221641 pull
• [[j0lms]] https://twitter.com/j0lms/status/1503390156438581248 pull
• [[flancian]] https://twitter.com/flancian/status/1506993731030900740 pull