Singularity University Panel on Open Source 2009-07-28 The Commons as a collective intelligence meta-innovation Mike Linksvayer Creative Commons Photo by asadal · Licensed under CC Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 · http://flickr.com/photos/68242677@N00/2117153416/
Creative Commons .ORG <ul><li>Nonprofit organization, launched to public December 2002
History (iv) Other early 2000s open content licenses (some of them Free): Design Science License, Ethymonics Free Music Public License, Open Music Green/Yellow/Red/Rainbow Licenses, Open Source Music License, No Type License, Public Library of Science Open Access License, Electrohippie Collective's Ethical Open Documentation License
History (v) Versioning of Creative Commons licenses (some of them Free): <ul><li>2002: 1.0
History (vi) Anti-proliferation? 2003: author of Open Content/Publication licenses recommends CC instead and PLoS adopts CC BY 2004: EFF OAL 2.0 declares CC BY-SA 2.0 its next version No significant new culture licenses since 2002 2008+: Possible Wikipedia migration to CC BY-SA
Indicators (community) 1993: Debian :: 2001 : Wikipedia <ul><li>8 years
Wikipedia’s success came faster and more visibly
Cygnus acquired by Red Hat (1999); Magnatune’s long term impact TBD
Magnatune may not be Free enough for some, but it seems like the best analogy for now </li></ul>
Indicators (big business) 1998: IBM :: ???? : ? <ul><li>No analogous investments have been made in free culture. Most large computer companies have now made large investments in free/open source software </li></ul>1998: Microsoft :: 2008 : Big Media <ul><li>Could Microsoft’s attitude toward openness a decade ago be analogous to big media’s today? </li></ul>
Indicators (Wikitravel) Very cool round-trip story: <ul><li>2003: Launch, CC BY-SA
2008: First Wikitravel Press paper titles </li></ul>Community is the new “IP”?
Indicators (NIN) Ghosts I-IV released 2008 under CC BY-NC-SA: <ul><li>$1.6m gross in first week
$750k in two days from limited edition “ultra deluxe edition”
This while available legally and easily, gratis.
NC doesn’t seem important in this story ... yet </li></ul>
Indicators (Summary Guesses) Free culture is at least a decade behind free software Except where it has mass collaboration/maintenance aspects of software, where it may rocket ahead (Wikipedia) Generally culture is much more varied than software; success will be spikey
In Innovation, Meta is Max “The max net-impact innovations, by far, have been meta-innovations, i.e., innovations that changed how fast other innovations accumulated.” Robin Hanson (Economist) http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/meta-is-max---i.html
Commons Meta innovation for Collective Intelligence?
$2.2 trillion Value of fair use in the U.S. Economy http://www.ccianet.org/artmanager/publish/news/First-Ever_Economic_Study_Calculates_Dollar_Value_of.shtml also see http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7643
Cyber terrorism (Cyber terror war on) Privacy breaches Loss of Generativity Lock-in Surveillance DRM Censorship Suppression of innovation Electoral fraud Luddism
Peer production works against concentrated power — doesn’t require concentrated production structures and lowers barriers to entry </li></ul>
Security theater and fear <ul><li>Access to facts mitigates fear and allows rational evaluation of responses
Commons work against three previous threats that drive security theater and fear </li></ul>
Can the success of the (digital) commons alter how we view freedom and power generally?
“The gate that has held the movements for equalization of human beings strictly in a dilemma between ineffectiveness and violence has now been opened. The reason is that we have shifted to a zero marginal cost world. As steel is replaced by software, more and more of the value in society becomes non-rivalrous: it can be held by many without costing anybody more than if it is held by a few.” Eben Moglen
“If we don’t want to live in a jungle, we must change our attitudes. We must start sending the message that a good citizen is one who cooperates when appropriate, not one who is successful at taking from others.” Richard Stallman
i.e., we can form collective intelligences instead of forced collectives ... and still “change the world”
Building the commons is key to achieving a good future <ul><li>Politicians and corporations are unimaginative ... they need to see solutions, or they react in fear
A dominant commons makes many collective stupidity scenarios much less likely
Beneficial collective intelligence needs universal access to culture, educational resources, research ... in machine-readable form </li></ul>
License <ul><li>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ </li></ul>Attribution <ul><li>Author: Mike Linksvayer
Link: http://creativecommons.org </li></ul>Questions? <ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul>Detail of image by psd · Licensed under CC Attribution 2.0 · http://flickr.com/photos/psd/1805374441