In Defense of Anagorism

political economy in the non-market, non-state sector

Tag: commons

  • Monetization = value subtraction

    As we speak, they’re flooding the internet with noise. Surely you can’t have not noticed just in the last few months the absolute deluge of “numbered” article titles and aggressively promoted content farms that went suddenly from either nonexistence or obscurity to apparent extreme popularity; vice, vox, upworthy, business insider, the disgustingly slick “blogging platform” medium.com, ad nauseam.

    Then you have formerly-respectable websites eagerly jumping on the clickbait bandwagon; Mother Jones, AlterNet, etc.

    Apparently they have reached the conclusion that they cannot afford the luxury of not doing so.

    The blogosphere still exists. So what if it’s “so 2006.” It’s the real deal; the real voice of real people, most of whom are amateurs, which is to say, people doing something they love. It still exists, but now you have to be really looking for it to find it. You have to filter out a shit-ton of noise to get to the signal. Noise is a “value subtracted” feature of the internet. It makes it take a gigabyte to do the work of a megabyte. I did more meaningful communicating 25 years ago on a 2400 bps modem, and Usenet was as useful for the essay form as blogging. The combination of the UNIX finger and talk commands was as useful for instant messaging as any of the “instant messager” platforms. IRC was as useful for online chat as any present day monstrosity in that space.

    For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. For hardware we have Moore’s Law, which has increased the performance specs of computing equipment in the hands of ordinary people by something like 10 orders of magnitude in 30 years. For traffic we have the fact that implementation requires monetization combined with the fact that, at least when it comes to informational goods, monetization requires value subtraction, so the monetizer has something to sell “back” to its audience. This currently takes the form of signal degradation (content dilution, SNR reduction). There has literally been enough signal dilution to cancel out the gains from Moore’s law when you consider the total payload in HTML, CSS, Javascript, Flash content and other traffic involved in reading a 100-character message via a web-based email provider, or a 300-word blog post on a lightly-monetized blog. Note that I don’t even mean blogs monetized by their writers. The present blog is [was] on wordpress.com, which now shovels up video advertising. In terms of bandwidth, a picture is easily worth a thousand words, and at 30 frames per second, 34 seconds of video is worth a thousand pictures. Assuming you aren’t using Ghostery or something similar to read the present post, you could easily be downloading a million times more bytes of advertising than of content.

  • Quotebag #96

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
    Elimination by ~autogestion

    “Are digital commons and urban commons doomed to feed the hand that bites them?”—Tom Slee

    “There is nothing occurring anywhere on the planet which reasonably justifies the existence of the CIA, the FBI or the NSA. The degree to which someone disagrees with this assertion is the degree to which that person can be relied upon to sacrifice you and your interests should the occasion ever arise.”—Jack Crow

    “David Cameron is beginning to realise that the problem with tax havens (and their attraction for those who use them) isn’t their low tax rates, it’s their secrecy laws.”—ejoftheweb

    “I don’t recognize the gay rights movement anymore. It’s about as vital and energetic as a trade show. Somewhere along the line, the message that arose from that movement changed from being ‘be who you are, without apology’ to ‘we can’t help it, so please let us, thanks.’”—Freddie

    “Crony capitalism IS capitalism.”—Patrick Dyer

    “I think all these ‘free trade’ agreements the US is up to are largely a tactic to head off and preempt the development of good magna-carta-style international law with corrupt-cronyism-style (a la East India Company) international law.”—Poor Richard

  • In pursuit of a nonbusiness model

    Any nonbusiness model. A single example of a noncommercial (but also nongovernmental) operating model in the context of any plausibly economic activity in any social setting. Perhaps there is not and never will be and even maybe never can be such an example; demonstrating yet again why nature abhors an anagora. Tom Slee, in Open Wide — The New Inquiry, gives us multiple examples of commons-based online communities that lost their innocence in one way or another, and in the process lost

    Image courtesy Sir josef (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported)
    Image courtesy Sir josef (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported)

    whatever authenticity, outsider appeal, alternativity, and the like that originally made these cool spaces in which to be a participant. Not wanting to pirate the article, I will give a list of the entities used as case studies:

    1. Bebo.com, now part of AOL
    2. Goodreads, now part of Amazon
    3. Mendeley, now part of Elsevier
    4. Tumblr, now part of Yahoo!
    5. Zipcar, now part of Avis
    6. IMDB, now part of Amazon
    7. Couchsurfing.com, formerly couchsurfing.org

    In about three quarters of these examples, the fact that the enrichment of the commons had become the sharecropping of the long tail became evident in the form of mergers and acquisitions. I have long wondered whether there’s something in the Iron Laws of Economics that dictates that the role of small businesses and startups is to serve as feeder fish in the world of commerce. I have also questioned whether the trend from employment employment to self employment is at all liberating, empowering, or even conducive to independence in some sense. In terms of my own options for combating nichelessness, I’ve thought of the trend from J.O.B. security to precarity as something I’m being backed into by a combination of a less labor-intensive economy, a less labor-driven polity, a disentitled generation of young adults, and other factors making “cushy” jobs harder to come by. So far, I’ve given the prevailing trend the benefit of the doubt and assumed that there are some people for whom a less risk-averse and less competition-averse culture is a better fit and a more opportune ecosystem, and that these people are in some way changing the world, but I’m beginning to question that. Startup founders describe themselves and their ventures as “disruptive,” but it’s getting hard to identify possible outcomes for such ventures other than (1) a failed business or (2) a business that is for sale. At best, it seems that cooptation is a stronger force than disruption. Is this too an Iron Law of Economics?