RE: [projectvrm] VRM iinfrastructure

["Crosbie Fitch" < >]

From: Devon Loffreto
>I agree with your intent.

Not so much intent as my reckoning of what is required for VRM
technologically (ultimately).

>But you must connect these dots to a practical strategy that has the
slightest chance of succeeding.

I think it's still useful to talk in terms of 'should' even if it is
extremely unlikely that what should happen will happen because there is a
consensus that it should. For example, copyright should be abolished, but it
is unlikely to be abolished because everyone has taken time to understand
the principles that give rise to the 'should'. It will be abolished because
its costs outweigh its benefits, and its abolition is therefore advanced as
advances are made in facilities that enable intellectual workers to exchange
their work for the money of the people who want the work to occur.

Understanding what 'should happen' in a broader sense is useful in
understanding how facilities should work and should be designed to work.

We don't have to change the law or people in order to develop VRM
facilities, but we should recognise the limits of law (natural and
unnatural) and people, and so understand what can or cannot be relied upon
as a sound foundation for VRM facilities.


>Abolish the W2 first. Make it impossible for corporate shells to employ
PEOPLE.
>Our priority must be strategically possible. This is the possible path
because 
>it puts power in the hands of Individuals. You can choose your structure.
You 
>do not have to be structured as a wage-slave.

If an alternative is provided that is more effective then the tradition will
be abandoned. One doesn't have to lobby for changes to the law. If the
people abandon corporate employment then one doesn't need to make it
impossible.


>In order to balance the power equation, we need to eliminate the unfair 
>advantage that is created by the binary structure of OWNER/NON-OWNER.

>       Own your ID.
>       Own your data graph.
>       Own your money.
>       Own your education.
>       Own your occupation.
>       Own your government.
>       Own your vote.
>       Own this planet.

It's important to recognise the difference between ownership of natural
property (physical objects or spaces, physically possessed or inhabited) and
figurative, abstract concepts that are more truths than property. For
example, I only own my identity in the sense that no-one else can truthfully
claim it, but simply because one can be said to own something, such as one's
shadow, that doesn't make it property or alienable.