From Open Source Ecology
Jump to: navigation, search


What is sharing?

Let's define. 'Sharing' is typically associated with something like giving an apple to someone, etc. But from a rigorous perspective, OSE's claim is that the deepest form of sharing is the creation and distribution of open source enterprise blueprints. Because the latter has the power to produce abundantly, outside the realm of Scacity-Based Economics - and therefore be the most giving - much more than giving an apple to someone. Literally, if the open source enterprise blueprint is for non-exclusive growth and enlightenment (starting with provision of physical (economic) needs and moving on to self-actualization) - then it would be clear how the most nurturing, giving person is engaged in the development of Open Sector economics. Which should not be confused with collectivism such as Stalin's collectivization of farms or The Great Leap Forward by Mao - which were centralist authoritarian schemes. We mean enlightened, distributed, responsible schemes originating with human creativity, not its suppression. What was the main difference between Stalin/Mao and open source? Probably that the latter is abundance in practice - while the former are dictator power grabs - ie, centralization of power instead of its distribution - based on a Scarcity Mindset. Distribution remains an unsolved frontier of economics, so it cannot yet be said that open source has reached the point of Distributive Enterprise. As Critical Theory predicted, the System has evolved sophisticated mechanisms for comfortable un-freedom.

The deepest form of sharing is thus sharing in the economic sense - open source product, organization, and institution knowhow - which starts with blueprints and ends with economic activity that is accessible to everyone without exception.

Sharing is a big concept. It is something we learned in kindergarten. But, that was all beaten out of us once we entered the workforce, and a typical focus of an energetic person changes from save the world to make money. I've seen that in Princeton, many graduates [1] end up on Wall Street, but that is just herd mentality. In lower ranked schools, many talk about 'saving the world' but end op in soul crushing scarcity economy jobs.

The patent system, one of the central institutions of modern civilization, enforces 'no sharing' economically. In the big sense, 'sharing is little practiced' in today's society. Greed is in. But enlightened greed could be good: one that is not about just your own benefit, but inclusive of the benefit of the world. That is, serving the world completely, under the enlightenment that we are all in it together.

This gets into mutually-beneficial self-interest. A stupid asshole will steal, use violence, and take from others. An enlightened person would seek to share as much as possible, based on principles of Abundance. This sharing, in the most enlightened sense, would be the sharing of economically significant knowhow. Because this knowhow is abundant and executable - once the knowhow has reached the level of open enterprise knowhow, the 'enlightened sharing person' would also share physical goods with others. The underlying driver of the 'enlightened person' is service and giving - because this person knows that the more they serve and give, the more comees back to them. This is a law of nature, or at least of spiritual nature. Cynycism means having learned the opposite of the principles of sharing and goodness.

Sharing and Fear of Survival

Why point this out? To clarify that when we discuss sharing in open source hardware, we are really talking about sharing economically significant capital - because the substance which we are sharing is product and process designs. Therefore, sharing in open hardware is really about sharing wealth and 'capital'. This helps one understand why Fear of Survival comes up when people are exposed to sharing open source information. It gets down into our reptilian brain level, where fear of survival is real.