OSE Experiment - Revision history

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-17T22:51:08Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 17 March 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=History=		=History=
	From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work~~. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear~~. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.		From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.

	Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:32:23Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:32, 16 March 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative. Thus, for example, we apply our techniques, such as ''radical productive efficiency of open, modular design and swarm builds'' to common products, such as the Seed Eco-Home.		In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative. Thus, for example, we apply our techniques, such as ''radical productive efficiency of open, modular design and swarm builds'' to common products, such as the Seed Eco-Home.

	Someone from the outside, without looking more deeply, may not notice that a product such as the [[Seed Eco-Home 4]], is designed for [[Distributed Market Substitution]] via [[Distributive Enterprise]] via [[The Edge of Knowledge]] which attempts [[Mass Creation of Genius]]. These are radical goals worth pursuing.		Someone from the outside, without looking more deeply, may not notice that a product such as the [[Seed Eco-Home 4]], is designed for [[Distributed Market Substitution]] via [[Distributive Enterprise]] via [[The Edge of Knowledge]] which attempts [[Mass Creation of Genius]]. These are radical goals worth pursuing. This is far from selling advanced housing at low cost like normal developers sell cookie cutter housing.

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:31:20Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:31, 16 March 2024
Line 6:		Line 6:
	In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative. Thus, for example, we apply our techniques, such as ''radical productive efficiency of open, modular design and swarm builds'' to common products, such as the Seed Eco-Home.		In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative. Thus, for example, we apply our techniques, such as ''radical productive efficiency of open, modular design and swarm builds'' to common products, such as the Seed Eco-Home.

	Someone from the outside, without looking more deeply, may not notice that a product such as the [[Seed Eco-Home 4]], is designed for [[Distributed Market Substitution]] via [[Distributive Enterprise]] via [[The Edge of Knowledge]] which attempts [[Mass Creation of Genius]].		Someone from the outside, without looking more deeply, may not notice that a product such as the [[Seed Eco-Home 4]], is designed for [[Distributed Market Substitution]] via [[Distributive Enterprise]] via [[The Edge of Knowledge]] which attempts [[Mass Creation of Genius]]. These are radical goals worth pursuing.

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:20:25Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 16 March 2024
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.

	In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative.		In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative. Thus, for example, we apply our techniques, such as ''radical productive efficiency of open, modular design and swarm builds'' to common products, such as the Seed Eco-Home.

			Someone from the outside, without looking more deeply, may not notice that a product such as the [[Seed Eco-Home 4]], is designed for [[Distributed Market Substitution]] via [[Distributive Enterprise]] via [[The Edge of Knowledge]] which attempts [[Mass Creation of Genius]].

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:16:37Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:16, 16 March 2024
Line 4:		Line 4:
	Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.

	In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy.		In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy. This does not mean that we lose any of our radical approach. We simply have to apply the principles of [[Good to Great]] to an enterprise whose core mission is to change the world - from proprietary to collaborative.

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:15:20Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:15, 16 March 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.		From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.

	Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023.		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023. Around 2020, carrying the theme of mass creation of right livelihood, it became clear to us that most people cannot choose right livelihood because the financial pressure upon them is great - just making a living is a full time job. We also began to realize fully that we cannot do much by catering to those who are already progressive and concerned global citizens - as most of the population does not have this privilege. So the idea must be, just like promised in 2011 - ''to change peoples' lives - in such tangible, material ways''. However, this could not be done, bluntly speaking, by catering to highly educated, eco hippies and trust funders. The vast majority of the population does not live in this world.

			In 2023, the clarity became simply: the way to change the world is through the products we use every day, and thus the approach must be to the mass market. Otherwise we act on the margin, a miniscule droplet in the ocean of the $100T global economy.

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:08:45Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:08, 16 March 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.		From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.

	Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the [[~~Mass Creation of~~ Right Livelihood]].		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the mass creation of [[Right Livelihood]] a la [[Gandhi]] - see [[Organizational Strategy]] from 2013 and 2023.

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:06:57Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:06, 16 March 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.		From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.

	Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the [[Mass Creation of Right Livelihood]].

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:06:41Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:06, 16 March 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.		From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.

	Factor e Farm started as a response to the ~~decline in~~ global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]].		Factor e Farm started as a positive response to the negative trend of global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]]. From 2006-2012 we focused on machine prototypes, discussed in the 2011 [[GVCS TED Talk]]. From 2013, we started to think much more about organizational development, so that the movement can actually grow. Because unlike the claim in the 2011 TED Talk - the movement began to grow on its own, but stalled. We attempted to run productive, hands-on workshops in the hopes of a sustainable funding model. We already knew from our early days in Madison in 2003 that for sustainability to grow, it must revolve around real products - the things we use every day. OSE was formulated as an attempt at the

	=More=		=More=

Marcin: /* History */

2024-03-16T20:01:21Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:01, 16 March 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=History=		=History=
	From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.		From early on we talked about the possibility of normalizing [[Integrated Humans]] - recorded first in 2009 [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Integrated_Human&dir=prev&action=history]. At first the question was - can we create sustainable, thriving communities by leveraging the power of modern science and technology? This soon changed to [[Regenerative Development]] rather than [[Sustainable Development]], keeping in mind seminal writing such as [[The Green History of the World]] - noting that environmental annihilation is, historically, not new. In the early days, up to 2012, lots of drama happened at Factor E Farm as we learned that most collaborators are in general not willing to take the responsibility to see that we are all in it together - that the solution must be inclusive and collaborative as opposed to isolationist (collapsitarian, continuation of scarcity-based economics, survivalist, libertarian, me first). Currently we recognize that the solution is '''We''', not '''Me'''. The only rational conclusion possible from such a mindset is [[Mutually Assured Abundance]], with techniques for getting there - such as [[Distributive Enterprise]]. Thus, distributive enterprise - part of the broader human enterprise - becomes an underlying theme in our work. As such, the importance of [[Numeracy]] becomes clear. The price ticket for a transition to the collaborative economy is, by one rough esitimate [https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/wiki/Edge_of_Knowledge#Cost_to_Open_Up_Education], $50B - less than the price of the proverbial as well as real cup of coffee. This is still roughly 1000x higher than the development cost of the [[Global Village Construction Set]] - our proposed product ecosystem or technology kernel for a basic economy, requiring about $50M in development cost.

			Factor e Farm started as a response to the decline in global democracy of 2006 - see [[Democratic Decline]].

	=More=		=More=