The Ownership Society

in LeoFinance2 months ago

It is interesting how things tend to work. At a time when we are undergoing "The Great Reset" as outlined by the World Economic Council, we see something different simultaneously taking place.

For those unaware, the Great Reset is the idea that, by around 2030, people will own nothing. Instead, it will be a situation where people use what they need but the ownership is not theirs.

This is causing debate within political circles. That discussion is outside the scope of this article. However, there is one area where humanity, at least those online, already lived in this world. When it comes to our "Internet Lives", there is little ownership.

It is a situation that got worse over the last decade as platforms such as Uber and Airbnb bridged the online world with our physical realm. Suddenly, taxis and hotels were under attack from this new business model.

While these companies, along with others, enjoyed success, there was a downside. It helped to foster more income inequality. This is simply due to the nature of how these platforms operate.

The "S-Curve" is a rather well known model of how technological adoption takes place. If we label a generic curve to represent the business models of the companies we are referring to, this is what we see.

scurve.png

This represents Facebook, Airbnb, Uber, and a host of other platforms that followed the same path.

Basically, what happens in the early stages is companies give away their service for free (or for a nominal cost). These days are focused upon the user experience whereby even more growth is attained. Of course, we must keep in mind that often there is a large amount of venture capital put up to fund the development and growth.

Eventually, the network effect takes over and these companies start to penetrate the markets they are focused upon. This leads to a clash between the users of the system and the investors. There comes a point where the investors, or Wall Street, wants to be paid. Thus, the user experience is pushed to the back burner for the sake of profitability.

Here is where the attraction stage that existed early on becomes the extraction as the investors pull more money out of the system.

Again, we see this across most of the application models over the last decade or two.

What is key here is the network effect, which is a very powerful force, ends up benefiting the extractors, not those who were attracted to the system.


Source

Token economics brings up a completely new model which drastically alters things. This actually turns the ownership debate on its ear. So while we saw people moving away from owning music and dvds, when it comes to online activity, we are heading in the opposite direction.

The Ownership Society is one where users own both their data and the platforms they are operating upon. Our present models hinder the user experience in quest for profits. Here is where we see Facebook placing more ads on its site; Google altering the payouts to content creators; Uber reducing the amount per mile that the drivers get; everyone selling user data.

With tokenization, the owners and users become one. In fact, they are the same. Those who use the platforms are the ones who also have the stake in it. Thus, most decisions are made with the needs of both in mind.

Also, unlike what we presently experience, the network effect stands to benefit the users, who are also the owners, instead of VC funds or Wall Street institutions.

Here is where we can easily see a reversal of the existing income inequality that is in place.


Source

This is not a discussion that is only being held in the cryptocurrency community. There are many futurists and technology-based institutions that are bringing up the same issues. Most are aware that the present model is not sustainable. As we move deeper into our digital world, this will only take on added meaning.

Ultimately, disruption takes place when a better system is found. Over time, as more realize the benefits, along with the technology improving, the split between the two models closes. At some point, the new starts to over power the old.

A couple months ago, I wrote an article discussing how the present social media companies are done. Obviously, they are still very powerful entities. Nevertheless, we can see where things are going.

The tokenization model simply is a much better path to pursue. It is going to overtake the present system because it benefits more people. Sure, there will still be very powerful players but they will have to operate in a different manner.

Over night success if often a process that takes more than a decade. In an era of instant gratification, people do not like to wait. However, most major disruptions are evolutionary in nature.

Just look at the S-Curve again. We are still in the attraction stage. What we are dealing with is novel to most people. In fact, many are not even aware of the problems that exist with the present online platforms. For most, they think things are just fine.

Yet, another reality is emerging. The power these entities wield is nearing absolute. Of course, we all know how power corrupts. This is a problem for every human on the planet who is not in the inner circle of these technology companies.

In a few years, the new model will be simply: only use what you own.

It will be through the usage that one gains an ownership stake. This is how the Ownership Society will work.


If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and rehive.

gif by @doze

vision2025.png

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Sort:  

Well, facebook is the trade that its users unconsciously are part of, they get to use it for free, but pay with personal data and other collateral damages. Nothing comes for free in this world. Still some would give crypto influencers free tokens and delegations...

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Still some would give crypto influencers free tokens and delegations...

LOL yes that does seem to be the case based upon yesterday's conversations.

Too many want to take the shortcut, quick approach. While it makes sense on the surface, it really doesnt. A paid influencer is a professional shill. Give me someone who is shilling in something he or she believes in any day.

One dedication comes through. A lot of that dedication comes as a result of using the product or service.

After all, does anyone believe Tom Selleck when he is out peddling reverse mortgages as a viable financial tool? Are we to believe that Magnum PI is out reverse mortgaging his properties?

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

The best shillers for HIVE and LEO are on the chain. No free tokens for them though...

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

That is very true. And they believe whole heartedly what they are saying.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

If the service is free; the product is me.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Exactly.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Hmm, I have the impression that even here on Hive a minority of whales/inner circle members are melking >90% of the reward pool and leave crumbs for the minnows. Hive is in the extraction phase already before it had started to attract the masses!
Better would have been, if the distrubution of the rewards would have been more decentralized to attract many users before starting melking. But this is clearly not wished, as seen by the nonlinear reward curve. Glad, that Leofinance is not repeating those mistakes!

The model of "The Great Reset," at least as I understand it, is basically the "Star Trek Future" where you have everything you need, there is no money, and you pretty much pursue what interests you... and somehow that's all supposed to add up to a more or less utopic future. Greed is evidently taken out of the picture because whereas you can always have as much as you want, you can't actually have more than you USE.

The hurdle always seems to be how we get from "here" to "there," giving the profiteering nature of most human beings.

Perhaps part of the answer... inside and outside the cryptosphere... is that we somehow need to learn to become a little more cooperative, and a little less competitive. Which probably requires a subtle shift from "lack" thinking to "plenty" thinking.

=^..^=

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

They are starting with energy which is fine. The challenge is they are doing it by collapsing the economy and trying to kill businesses. Their goal is to get everyone into a UBI situation which, is also fine, but not if forced.

Technology operates at its own pace and when forced, back things happen. For example, you cant change the energy grid in 5 years, it will not support it. We simply cannot generate enough power (or store it) right now to make up for the closing of fossil fuel plants.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

I own my own hive interface.

With tokenization, the owners and users become one.

I just started using the word cooperative a few days ago, but I think it best sums up what HIVE is - in the purest sense of the word.

A cooperative (also known as co-operative, co-op, or coop) is "an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned enterprise".[1] Cooperatives are democratically owned by their members, with each member having one vote in electing the board of directors. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative

Yep. That sums it up to a tee.

Look at this one: https://www.rei.com/b/rei-co-op

This is exactly what these platforms we are creating are, except we are online.

Co-ops have been around for a long time, many of them highly successful. The reason why many fail is they do not scale well. That is a drawback to the commons. With digital, however, scaling is not an problem, at least in the sense that affects offline co-ops.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Only use what you own. Or in other words, we are all together and not one against the other.

Your current Rank (33) in the battle Arena of Holybread has granted you an Upvote of 16%

pixresteemer_incognito_angel_mini.png
Bang, I did it again... I just rehived your post!
Week 31 of my contest just started...you can now check the winners of the previous week!
9

There is quite a bit of information to unpack here. So i'm going to try to do some short summaries. I think this trade off as it were. Where facebook and major social media platforms pay for all the servers and marketing etc., and the end user gets to use it free, maybe becomes a huge problem as the end user lacks the option to either decide to sell their data and share in the profits.

The option to opt out of data sharing and ads appearing etc., would be more idea to some. So i don't think the problem is that the data is sold. I think the issue is that we're not the benefactors. In a product where everything is produced almost by the end user. This seems to be a tough pill to swallow. So for us that believe data is the oil of the 21st century. We're not receiving our tech check. Someone else is.

When it comes to censorship resistance and privacy concerns. Well my experience around many social media sites are they can't wait to share their info with the world. They want people to know who they are etc., We had private networks like 20 years ago and if this was a great concern the option existed for people to use those. So i don't think that's the biggest issue right now selling of data.. personal privacy violations etc., I don't think that's really what the end user is complaining about.

I think the problem with cryptocurrency has been that the structure and system as it were hasn't changed a great deal as much as the players have. Now you're dealing with the developers, miners, exchanges and centralization of wealth issues. So this has taken another form.

So a commentor on this thread mentioned

stayoutoftherz 71
5 hours ago

Hmm, I have the impression that even here on Hive a minority of whales/inner circle members are melking >90% of the reward pool and leave crumbs for the minnows.

So now the issue of who pays for the network has shifted from vc's and institutions to this inner circle of whales. Another thing interesting without getting too far off track is i find that almost every successful crypto project had ridiculously large startup capital from venture capital. So crypto's biggest strenght of being grassroots and decentralized in many important aspects in actuality hasn't happened yet. Although bitcoin started off very promising. Development teams working for free just based on the idea of changing the system. Well it became this totally capitalized model where the average person could not mine and now the people who need to own btc the most don't.

I feel like we still don't get it. Ideas like the Ownership Society..where we own everything.. we own our own products and means of production sounds similar to another "ism" we use in society lol. Somone in the thread mentioned Star Trek where money is actually pointless because they have replicators. The interesting idea about all these ideas is that one already exist that doesn't require star trek tech or sophisticated technology or anything.

One such idea lies in ubi and in the " social network" the "social" the dynamics at play of swe use social media and we own it. Well to me whether its a network of servers or a network of people. The idea and concept is the same we all own it. So one statistic suggest that every person in the world could own 7 acres of land. The earth is that big and plentiful now tech could work out the logistical concerns but you come to a point where there is this global ownership where you don't per se even need money. You need to logistically move resources but not really money. So then an idea like ubi on the blockchain is not a machination or a broken capitalistic model but a new 21st century model that works well with social networks.

So ownership can't work in a way where i can manipulate your ownership from you. It maybe shouldn't work where i sit up here all day trading trying to find a way to get your money. That doesn't make the world better and it produces no real useful by product. So if tokenization is ownership of all we rightful control and use. Then there shouldn't exist a way for certain power vaccuums to control much more than they need or it should exist an ownership that your value remains in as a participant in that system and your place in an participatory economy and not a manufactured one to be controlled by the value of a few reducing the "human" value to an aggregate value of zero.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta