Simon wrote:
> "For me, dependence on other people is neither a good thing,
>nor a necessary thing".
For good or for bad I cannot debate, but simply in living we are dependent
upon each other. When I get up in the morning and make a cup of coffee I
have depended on people, the grower of the beans through the clerks in the
store in which I purchased the ground and packaged coffee. The water
works people, the power people and the people in the coffee pot company
all get credit.
So it goes throughout the day, every day. Right now -- the people who
assembled this computer.
>It is the realization of the voluntary exchange principle that no-one need
>do anything they do not want to that renders collective negotiation and
>compromise unnecessary. Choices exist, and therefore independence.
There may be places in this world where freedom of choice, anarchy,
abounds but they are few in number. In rural communities one either farms
or starves -- a limited choice. Even in America's post industrial society
there are many people whose choice is limited. Many, I would even venture
most, Americans have compromised their lives in some way. Whether this is
bacause of poor choices made or conditions of our society's structure is
debatable, but the lack of options is real.
>It is reduced transaction costs (WILLIAMSON et al) caused by enabling
>technologies such as the Internet and electronic agents (personal
>electronic servants) that allow individuals to work together
>impermanently, informally.
If the transaction cost is really reduced is available to only a small
percentage of the world's population and a smaller percentage of commerce.
I have not seen recent figures but the last I remember is that in America
about 15% of housholds are Internet connected. Worldwide the percentage
is, I think, less than 2 percent. The transaction cost of tilling the
land, animal husbandry, building an home etc., etc. are little effected by
the internet. The carpenter and the painter may work together
impermanently -- but not informally.
>I believe that it is not just possible to eliminate companies as we know
>them today
As America seeks alternatives to working in the office every day, our high
tech industries find that this works only part time. Most professionals
find that they need the face-to-face time with their collaborators. Work,
even high technology work, is still a social experience. Our human
evolution dosen't seem to free us from the desire to belong to some
community and electronic only communities still seem unfulfilling to most
people. If electronic isolation from human to human concat is ever to be
-- I'd bet on many generations of evolution go by before it is so. Isn't
it nice that people still do like to be with people?
>One of the biggest problems with organized society is exclusion.
>Technological capitalism on the other hand is the opportunity for all
>people to pursue the opportunities is facilitated by these unorganized
>world trends.
While I agree exclusion is a problem I think that 'technological
capitalism' is not available to enough people to make it a real force for
inclusion.
>People who do not fit into organized systems such as gang
>members
Whoops! Who said that gangs are not organized? Try breaking into a gang
or crossing the decision of the gang leader. Moreover, they don't need
technology to make money. A little thuggery here and there can bring in
the money. Look at the street gangs selling protection in Chicago or the
dock gangs in Japan.
>I do not know how long list members will continue to reinvent outmoded
>organized collective structures such as companies and teams.
Groups of people working together toward some mutual objective are a
necessary part of modern society. Producing a moderate sized computer
program, designing the next Internet, establishing a way to transfer value
(money) all result from groups of people fromally working together over
extended periods. All of these efforts still seem to require face-to-face
interaction. I conclude that companies and teams are valid names for
these communities. I suspect that they will be valid human communities
for many years to come, both in the technological and in the
non-technological world
It is my dependence upon thousands of people working in their profession
that permits me to pursue mine. I am thankful for them and for their
companies.
--"William J. Hobler, Jr" <bhobler@worldnet.att.net>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>