I am, but there's another ethical conflict, plus I think it
is seriously flawed as an experiment "...for testing whether a real,
thriving, modern-day prototype community of 200 people can be built
<snip>"
I've read the social contract, and read what will be
considered for long-term tenure, such as "Ability to hold one’s own weight
intellectually...This level of ability is comparable to the level found at the
post-graduate level in academia...freedom from various psychological
ills...Good health and being fully able-bodied, since many tasks at FeF involve
physical work." If you're calling 200 smart, well educated, healthy, fully
able-bodied people a modern-day prototype community, your elitism is drifting
toward the creepy.
I've never read that before.
"We are interested in eliminating these compromises by creating communities that can provide all their own needs resiliently, based primarily on local resources – without external interference. The above experiment cannot work in isolation. It can succeed only if a global network of similar autonomous communities is created."
Haha, that's silly. We want to build self-sufficient villages and we can't do that without building other villages for them to depend on. I think someone posted the first draft.
"FeF operation is not based on financial support from top-down sources, savings, endowments, or any other ‘trustafarian’ means of fiscal unaccountability. FeF is made by the present effort of participants."
That seems to totally contradict the current strategy of spamming every foundation that might possibly cough up money for OSE's work.
"...the community’s control by remote power centers – and tendencies such as war-faring are built right into the community fabric. Thus, as a general point of community design – communities can be most resilient and peaceful only if they can provide all of their needs."
Debateable. This is the tired old argument that wars are always about resources. I disagree. I think that's an oversimplified explanation.
I don't think you need to take that "document" seriously. It's obviously a stream-of-consciousness set of notes.
"I agree with Marcin and OSE in most things, but this
is contemptible. "Because FeF is a serious attempt at reengineering
civilization, only those who can rise to this challenge are invited to
participate," eh? Just what is the future you envision?"
Meh, reality always gets its way. The part of the plan where 200 people actually come together to build a civilization is, to understate somewhat, the most questionable part. I predict these machines will be far more useful by being integrated into the rest of the world than by recreating the world in parallel. For every autonomous village there will be a thousand normal villages that just need some tractors and solar power. The economic benefit will be realized as cheaper and more capable open source technology gradually (emphasis on the long timeline) replaces its old and busted counterparts.
I don't think that document was intended to be published. It smells raw.
I suspect he was mixing up thoughts on how he wants to run his farm, where certain work needs to be delivered on some sort of schedule, and thoughts on how a generic "village" might be organized. Obviously the organization of a research facility is going to be different when compared to a living space. FeF's goal is takig in money and spitting out open source machine designs (in my understanding). The goal of a "self-sustaining village" would be to fulfil Maslow's Hierarchy.
Also, I doubt the "self-sustaining vilage" part of the plan is ever going to happen. I'm sure it's entirely possible for plenty of pseudo-self-sustaining-villages to pop up, or break off, or merge or whatever. But I doubt that specific model will ever be influential.
OSE may well be a powerful influence on humanity. I support OSE because I think OSE matters. I don't think the current economy (based on scarcity) can continue upward, and a major social revision is in order. I think Marcin is brilliant, that his ideas can change the world, and that with great power comes great responsibility.
This is hardly a “modest
wiki." This is a guideline for a new civilization. “Governments as we know them
become obsolete with the advent of open source ecology”; well, I think the guy
who wrote that, means it. I don't think the Social Contract v1.0 document is stream of consciousness, or a rough draft, or wasn't meant to be published; it has been the operative document for selecting FeF participants since August of
2009, when it was posted as a major revision of Factor_e_Farm_Social_Contract,
which went live in October 2008. If Marcin wants to staff the OSE Village like it's a mission to Mars, I've no problem with that. I object to its presentation as an experiment in community building.
I'm not comparing Marcin with Hiter, nor to the proponents of a dozen other bold social experiments, I am comparing policies. Historically, when resources run short, societies determine who is deserving of the resources. The OSE philosophy, which will be demonstrated by the OSE Village, appears positive for all; it isn't until we get into the Social Contract that "all" gets winnowed down to the 4% (my calculation) who are the Best and Brightest and Fittest.
If it is a success, this "social experiment" will prove that OSE can produce thriving communities, providing they are not saddled with undesirables...the elderly and other
less-than-fully-ablebodied, the mentally inadequate who are operating at less than postgraduate
level, the idlers, and the immoral. If this experiment is performed as described, when Marcin presents the results to the public, few people will say, "Wait a minute, where's the control group? How well does a two year experiment translate into lifetime community? Would it still have succeeded if the participants had included a broader slice of humanity?" Most people will take it at face value, and there may be unfavorable consequences.
A hundred years ago, "experiments" of this nature fueled the American Eugenics Movement, which didn't have much impact on society until times got hard--the 1929 Stock Market Crash and the Great Depression--and that's when things got jumping. By 1933, when Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, 33 of the United States had passed (and were using) forced sterilization laws to improve America, and the Nazis declared America's eugenics policies (if I may paraphrase) a beacon of light to benefit of all people on Earth. The rest is history; history that ended in Germany long before it did in the US; I can't speak for anyone else's state history but my own, but the Oregon
compulsory sterilization law was repealed and its Board of Social Protection
(does that name sound strangely familiar?) was disbanded in 1983, and the book wasn't fully closed until 2002, when our governor apologized for our state's participation in these activities. So the slippery slope is not without its precedents, and I hope Social_Contract_v2.0 has some room for the bottom 96%. If this is a small error, then it can be easily remedied.
I don't think FeF is ever going to be part of the experiment. That place is supposed to be a campus. It doesn't have to turn a profit because it will be the focal point of donations. Experiments will happen there, and those experiments need to be done by qualified experimenters. Eventually, someone will try to establish a GVCS-based village from scratch, and there's no telling what their agenda will be. Most likely they'll be some kind of radical, since that will be a sure way to get the money and manpower necessary.
However, it's all irrelevant. The work FeF is doing is non-profit and open source. Anyone can use it for anything.
How Marcin wants to run his backyard has nothing to do with how anyone else is going to run their backyard. That's part of the point of the project. Open source is specifically designed to prevent the possibility of being held accountable to anyone. Marcin doesn't get to dictate how replications happen. Sure, he can support things he agrees with, but that's nothing new.
Don't go into this project blind. People ARE going to use the technology we produce to do things we disagree with. You should come to terms with that right now.
Terra Foundation, a 501(c)(3) corporation organized in San Luis Obispo, California, USA, is acting as the fiscal sponsor for Open Source Ecology (OSE). OSE is thus able to process tax-deductible contributions from USA donors." http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/OSE_Financial_Transparency
"Create a fundraising team to find Funding Sources appropriate to the OSE Work. Distribute the tasks to the people in the team and start working on them.
Funds from European Foundations will be received by the OSE Europe Foundation, see the blog post by Robert Anteau).
Funds from USA Foundations will be received by the Terra Foundation - OSE is currently under the its fiscal sponsorship, see OSE Financial Transparency." http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Fundraising_Strategy
My impression is that OSE a non-profit administered by Marcin. I could be wrong about the details, tho. I haven't heard any rumors of anyone overriding Marcin's decisions.
Thanks, Aaron. That is very helpful. What is the name of the FeF trust and who owns it? Are the trust documents available on OSE's website?
When will the tax exempt/ non-profit status documents be filed? Who will serve on the Board of Directors?
I saw plans for this change that were posted several months ago - maybe last May. But I understand your post to say that OSE has not yet filed for tax exempt/non-profit status and continues to operate, at least for now, as a for-profit organization and all OSE funds and assets other than the real estate at FeF are owned by Marcin. There is no Board of Directors at this time. Correct? The information I have found that is available to potential contributors has not been clear on these points.
Don't mean to divert this discussion from Jack's original post about disability and diversity issues. But I think that understanding how OSE/FeF are owned and governed is the first step in addressing the legal, moral and even practical concerns raised here.
Lets see if I understand...your fear/worry/question is that if Marcin carefully selects only highly capable and productive members of FeF, then anyone who starts a GVCS-based village will be so impressed with his intellect they will assume ONLY geniuses can make the GVCS work, and will likewise exclude the stupid and handicapped?
I dunno. Excluding obvious things like violating the law I have a philosophical problem with telling people how to organize their village. I got into this to give people more/better options, not to restrict their options to only the activities I approve of. I think Makerbot's hermit crab shell project is retarded and the resources could be applied to a more pressing problem, but they're not hurting anyone. Sure, they might not be HELPING as much as they COULD, but that's not a legitimate reason to have a problem with their activities. In the same way, if Marcin doesn't use the first GVCS-based village as an opportunity to advance the cause of feminism, or gay rights, or recognition for handi-capable-ness, it's not going to bother me.
I'll save my worrying for the first psycho, child-abusing cult leader who uses the GVCS to build an impenetrable, self-supporting compound. Or the first warlord who rolls troops into GVCS-equipped villages and forces them to start building tanks. Or the first terrorist who "starts a village" but uses the tools and fertilizer to make a dozen open source car bombs.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!