Re: <nettime> Review: Michel Bauwens and The Promise Of The

[Jaromil <jaromil@dyne.org>]

hi all,

On Thu, 31 Mar 2016, nettime's value chain wrote:

> This is why Jaromil helped produce FreeCoin, an e-wallet created for
> exchange and trading between friends; he calls it a ‘social
> wallet’. FreeCoin is a social currency that adapts the ‘proof of
> work’ concept used in Bitcoin to validate social gifting and
> exchange within communities. In experimenting with the proof of work
> concept Jaromil is re-defining how value is expressed and exchanged
> by people and how technology can measure and distribute that
> value. By putting people at the center of the design of FreeCoin,
> Jaromil wants to re-instate trust into a trustless system.

> Although it is an admirable concept I am concerned there is a
> disheartening ramification in turning the quality of a person’s
> social relations into a cypto-currency. In order to account for the
> value shared between friends and social groups, FreeCoin software
> would need to measure and quantify those friendships to validate it
> as ‘social currency’.

the INC guest blogger here misinterpreted the focus of the project, to
his merit still goes that this is a rather easy pitfall unless one
reads all the non-2.0 (boring) literature around the project.

Freecoin is a toolkit for credit risk mitigation, see it as a
framework to build Chamas (African bottom-up banking solutions) or
sort of grass-root clearing-houses. It does _not_ suggests that
everyone needs a wallet any time there is a social relation.

So to say: if developers propose a cryptographic solution (=not by sw
convention) to a specific problem, it still doesn't means they think
the problem is everywhere and the solution needs to be applied
everywhere.

Freecoin is _not_ a tool to validate social relations, we do not
advise nor equip it at any scale to build quantitative user reputation
systems.

To think that reputation and ranking systems are the only solution to
credit risk is a dominant, axiomatic, neo-liberal solution proposal to
present problems.

There are qualitative solutions to the problem and they cannot be
automated, but only aided, adopted, appropriated and run by
communities, bottom-up. They are also based on ownership of production
means and political decision-making processes that include "workers".

There is no money to be made for big corps there, but there is
wellfare to be gained by participants, significantly reducing
financial dependency from central-banking systems, for which the
crisis of trust is the real disease.

This because we believe risk is much better handled bottom-up and in a
decentralized fashion.

ciao

-- 
Denis Roio aka Jaromil   http://Dyne.org think &do tank
  CTO and co-founder      free/open source developers
加密  6113 D89C A825 C5CE DD02 C872 73B3 5DA5 4ACB 7D10

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: