planetary survival

planetary survival.png

116 page pdf []

by Michel Bauwens and Alex Pazaitis (also authored commons manifesto)

intro’d here:

Michel Bauwens (@mbauwens) tweeted at 4:57 AM on Tue, Mar 12, 2019:
@doctorow : dear Cory, I think you might find this of interest: “How shared perma-circular supply chains, post-blockchain distributed ledgers, protocol cooperatives, and three new forms of post-capitalist accounting, could very well save the planet.”

from kate‘s prologue to accounting for planetary survival:

So leave behind today’s widespread obsession with smart contracts, platform capitalism and economies of scale: these only serve to reinforce last century’s dominant and extractive modes of production. Instead, dive into this report and discover the possibilities of Ostrom contracts, platform cooperativism and economies of scope

contracts et al as cancerous.. begs we move beyond causes/measuring et al




towards a p2p infra for a socially-just circular society – how shared perma-circular supply chains, post-blockchain, distributed ledgers, protocol coops, and 3 new forms of post-capitalist accounting could very well save the planet..

ch 1: background to study (commons and emerging crypto econ for local transition.. vision)

yeah.. let’s do commons/common\ing) .. but  not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake.. ie: a nother way

ch 2: tools/techs for integrated, fair and sustainable ecosystem of production (holochain, daostack, faircoin, faircoop, ubi, fabchain, ostrom contracts)

let’s just try this tool: tech as it could be.. with 2 convers as infra

ch 3: evolution of accounting (commons based, open value coop, accounting system for networked coop, regen network, competing for positive impact..)

perhaps we need to let go of any form of measuring/accounting.. perhaps we’re not really common ing.. if we’re accounting.. (ie: measuring as managing et al)

executive summary


the key issue addressed in this study is how to change a system which incentivizes and rewards extraction – but cannot recognize and reward the wealth created by generative activities – towards a system which is able to reward and incentivize generative practices

who.. huge red flag (that we’re not really changing the system).. thinking we need incentives/rewards

ch1 – background/vision


rachel o’dwyer also provides an extra warning: if we design distributed ledgers following the values/processes of ‘methodological individualism’ we also end up generalizing and socially reproducing these neolib mechs..


as salvatore iaconesi warned, distributed ledgers may end up transactionalizing our entire lives..



thus, blockchain capitalism is indeed a new form of capitalism in which the commons are embraced, but also to a large degree instrumentalized

can’t partially embrace the commons.. any partial ness.. makes it not common ing.. because it needs to be all of us for it to work..


our proposals reflect the conviction that we can tweak and transform the general idea of the distributed ledger to make it into a set of tools for production for the common good

rather.. for curiosity for the common good.. ie: hlb via 2 convers that io dance.. as the day..[aka: not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake…]..  a nother way


as fred ehrsam of coinbase expressed it: how do you get people to join a brand new network?

wrong question.. irrelevant.. what matters is getting people to wake up.. everyday..  ie: what world needs most: the energy of 7bn alive people

ch 2 – tools/techs for production


we are witnessing the surface of a broad array of digital tools and practices that are relevant to *representing the value of social and economic interactions.. such externalities, both positive and negative, are largely invisible from the current accounting media, which recognize almost exclusively price mediated transactions.. by contrast, we now have increasing tech and social **capacities to account for a more pluralistic, socially and environmentally embedded, economic reality

dang guys.. get out of the box/loop.. what we have now is the **capacity to let go of all the measuring/accounting.. ness.. and we’re missing it

we don’t need to *rep the value of interactions..

our mapping is structured in 3 layers:

1\ a mutual integration layer.. where distributed ledgers and shared supply chains are used to facil info and knowledge flows in productive communities in order to enable and guide contributions..

what we need is to listen to and facil/connect daily curiosities

2\ layer of circulation and exchange mechs that procure/allocate the required human cooperation as well a s material and energy resources..

energy we need most is from 7b alive people.. not from any desire outcomes..

3\ layer of planning frameworks.. allow the management of matter and energy flows… can be used to direct resources to societal priorities  (ue: doughnut econ)

red flag we’re not trusting us enough ie: undisturbed ecosystem: ‘in undisturbed ecosystems ..the average individual, species, or population, left to its own devices, behaves in ways that serve and stabilize the whole..’ –Dana Meadows

won’t ever work unless we let go of all the managing ness..

beyond doughnut ness


what we are specifically doing in the next two chapters is asking ourselves the question: how can we tweak and transform the current wave of blockchain based distributed ledger tech. w its libertarian anarcho capitalism and ‘austrian economics’ based premises, so that we can arrive at ledger tech s which are more compatible w a socially just, ecologically sustain able manufacturing and production system

that’s what we want ? manufacturing and production..?

i think what we want is eudaimoniative surplus

which we could get back/to if we focus our blockchains or whatever.. on augmenting interconnectedness

e: hlb via 2 convers that io dance.. as the day..[aka: not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake…]..  a nother way

while reading.. this tweet (link is ref from planetary survival):

RT @Jack_Minchella: “The moment we stop optimizing the digital economy for the growth of capital and instead optimize it for the circulation of
value between people, everything will start to get better really fast.” @rushkoff
cited in:
Original Tweet:

perhaps even faster (and finally out of broken feedback loop) if optimize for facil/connection of daily curiosities

that way ie: value remains undefined/alive


the main reason bitcoin and its blockchain are inefficient in terms of energy consumption is that every new transaction has to be validated by the whole network, leading to an exponential increase in the number of resources needed to maintain the system. holochain does this significantly different. it is technically not a blockchain, but simply a way for separate ledgers to cooperate and become interoperable w each other.. hence, holochain is infinitely scalable at marginal cost

holochain for hosting-life-bits – whatever


holochain rather relies on its peers to ensure the integrity of the data shared among them.. the peers of the network hold part of the data and validate it against a set of shared validation rules.. in other words.. users audit each other’s actions to see whether they have been authored in accordance w their common validation rules

another huge waste of energy here.. imagining ie: gershenfeld something else law so that inspectors of inspectors (aka: validation et al) is irrelevant


daostack .. provides a stack of tech tools for the development of daos, comprising a) a framework fore deployment of smart contracts on ethereum blockchain  b) front end developer environ   c) user interface enabling funding and resource allocation.. crypto tokens and invite others to participate and support their ideas..

yeah.. seeing daostack ness as irrelevant.. if we let go of money (any form of measuring/accounting)


main motivation is to provide a tech infra to diff decentralized orgs, on that would create a collab environ, accessible to a critical mass of people.. moreover, daostack instigators aspire to effectuate a fine balance between the number of decisions a collective can make in a period of time, and resilience ie: the incorruptibility of those decisions.. for this collective decision making process has been developed.. called holographic consensus.. coordination guided by crypto tokens.. function as incentives..

we can do better.. ie: 2 convers as infra.. because public consensus always oppresses someone

tools for circulation and exchange – faircoin et al.. all via some token model

perhaps we let go of exchange.. ness


ostrom’s contracts

3 – evolution of accounting


accounting systems: guerrilla translation tracks/rewards value in livelihood/love/care work; regen network; musiasem; .. finance streams..

am seeing rewards/tracking as cancer to humanity


michel fb share:

dear friends,

I am supremely happy that our report is finally out, very nicely lay-outed and with many important graphical summaries. It may sound like hubris, but what we are proposing is a global (cosmo-local) infrastructure, which can allow us to produce for human need, without destroying the life chances of other beings and the planet, with whom we are in fundamental partnership. This report is about the infrastructural aspects of going from here to there.

Enjoy, and please forward and diffuse, even to your cousins in accounting, and your aunt in logistics.

Michel Bauwens

“what we are describing here is a 3-layered economy, and its infrastructure, that is able to coordinate production, by transcending and including the 3 great methods of allocating resources:

* Mutual coordination through shared logistics and shared accounting

* Ethical, generative market mechanisms for the fair exchange of resources

* A planning framework, indicating the planetary resources available for human choice, so that we can produce while preserving the planet and its beings, and even regenerating them.”