The Zero Marginal Cost Society

Video

Website - third industrial revolution consulting - https://foet.org/contact/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-iDUcETjvo

book - https://foet.org/project/the-zero-marginal-cost-society/

OSE Mention

OSE's work was mentioned in the book, and the Author send a copy of the book to MJ. It would be worthwhile to invite Dr. Rifkin in the the OSE fold.

See Google Books - [1]

Contact

Hi Jeremy and Michael,

Our work was mentioned in The Zero Marginal Cost Society (excerpt attached), and I wanted to reach out to explore whether advancing practical zero-marginal-cost economic systems remains a strategic priority for your team. Thank you for sending us a copy of the book back in 2014. 

We have been deeply inspired by your theory and are now executing it concretely in the housing sector. Our work focuses on taking housing toward zero marginal cost through open-source, production-grade machines that manufacture key building materials using solar photovoltaic energy.We have already productized a simple, production-ready home model and are now scaling the machinery required to reduce materials cost from about $60,000 to roughly $10,000 for a 3-bed/2-bath home. This effort builds on two decades of R&D in open-source machine design and enterprise innovation. Our goal is to achieve our “Freehouse” milestone by 2028 as a meaningful contribution toward the Zero Marginal Cost Society.

Today, our build cost is approximately $100k ($60k materials / $40k labor), compared to an industry standard near $180k, and our next target is $50k through open, industrial-grade materials production. This is not theoretical work—we are building real homes while openly publishing replicable enterprise models to make zero-marginal-cost housing genuinely attainable. We believe authentic open innovation is essential to realizing ZMCS in practice.

We are also establishing the Future Builders Academy to train teams in these methods and systems: https://learn.opensourceecology.org/

Would your team be interested in discussing collaboration on zero-marginal-cost housing and infrastructure development? I would welcome a video conversation or guidance on how best to engage with your initiatives.Thank you for your time and consideration.Sincerely,

Marcin Jakubowski

Founder & Director

Open Source Ecology

Comments

• The argument for zero marginal cost can be extended to hardware-intensive enterprises - such as roads. At first thought - this seems impossible - because of significant material costs which are far from zero marginal cost: They cost $1M/mile to build, and $500k/mile to maintain per year!!! See Cost of Building Highways.
  • How to reconcile? By reducing the cost of materials - by reducing the cost of machines involved in producing the materials - and by automating much of the process. All of this can be achieved by open design.
  • This is an opportunity: how to translate zero marginal cost to the world of 'capital intensive physical goods'. OSE is doing exactly this - with the aim of reducing materials cost of housing to zero. See Cost Reduction page.
• Did the book publishing industry get destroyed with the zero marginal cost of internet publishing? Certainly in Japan - [2], but can't find similar data for the USA.
• Music sales - [3]
• Open Source Ecology is mentioned on p. ____________

Critique

MJ sez - at present, the zero marginal cost society concept is an utter failure. While specif tech becomes cheaper, and indeed comes close to zero marginal cost (microprocessors, PV cells, solar electricity at 1 cent per kwhr if used locally, many materials (wheat costs 13 cents per pound, crude oil at 25 cents per pound) - the Cost of Living is constantly increasing. Savings from powerful technology do not translate to reduced cost of living, in general. The culprit is Aggregate Productivity and Centralization. As a result, Wealth Distribution and War persist as issues related to the Artificial Scarcity of zero marginal cost - ie, lack of good execution in delivering Integrated Zero Marginal Cost.

By User: Eric

• I think mainly:
  • Some materials are always going to have a certain amount of “cost”, especially if non-local materials etc
  • Many things are already quite “cheap”, but all the “savings” are transmuted into “profit”
    • So record Productivity/Efficiency (like the “we made the can x% thinner, saving is x USD per can making us millions of profit per year” etc)
    • I think the failure of Regulation / Reganonomics / Trickle Down Economics is moreso at fault than the ability to engineer/produce cheaper things
• ALTHOUGH I THINK
  • Having a Parallel Society / Parallel Economy gradually form, where you can get Higher Quality (In Immediate Quality, in R2R Friendliness / Documentation, in BIFL - ness (ie no Planned Obsolescence / short supported Product Lifespans etc) for less and less money
    • In the early phases this may be roughly the same cost/slightly more, but this is not HORRIBLE at least early on for “what you get for that cost”
    • As the parallel economy grows though this would become closer to equal pricing or the savings would kick in (Due to designs being finished, networks already formed/workers trained up etc)
    • In leu of some great change perhaps too, the products may never be “cheaper than the alternative”, just in the same range
      • This is not a failure, but just the result of “Not being able to compete against Modern Day Slavery” / Ecological Destruction or Extractivism etc
      • To reiterate, we don’t want to be a Whole Foods/Whole Paycheck situation, but to think we can in any short/near term be the $1 Bananna Republic Banananas made by (Non-Union due to State Sponsored Terrorism) Poor Workers, or Subsidized+Supply Chain Optimized Commodity Grains etc is a bit of an unrealistic goal in my opinion
        • Being a “nicer” option of some fruit that is in season locally and makes sense there is what OSE should shoot for, to stretch the metaphor a bit
        • NOT THAT long term moonshot goals / having Prasad from Pantheon (TV Series) type “vision” is bad, but unconstrained vision/Scope Creep and successful projects don’t overlap too well short of Superpower level Defense Fund projects etc
          • And the irony of ME saying “scope creep is bad” is not lost on me lol
• All in all, i think this is a neat concept/goal, but “Capitalism didn’t Replace Feudalism in a Year” is my main counterpoint/qualifier
  • That and the “certain things will never be hyper local/require scale or location specific materials etc”

Evolution

Zero marginal cost is a myth in a remote sense, because it costs something - an exchange of energy and materials of some sort - to convert one form of substance to another. However, if the cost of the conversion of natural resources into the lifestuff of modern civilization can be achieved with open knowhow and near-free energy - then zero marginal cost for hardware can be achieved as well. OSE is working on such open knowhow. Near free energy is available from solar panels - at under 20 cents per watt today. Therefore, essential zero marginal cost can be achieved. Thus, Universal Basic Assets can be the new engine of progress, as opposed to Scarcity-Based Economics. Thus, Open Sector Enterprise, can become the new model that delivers Universal Basic Assets - and achieves Practical Post-Scarcity with ideologies replaced by the distributed raw power of efficient and humane production a la Drucker.

If Lifetime Design is added to the discussion, then the above is 10x more possible.