User:Jukeboksi/Blog/March2004: Difference between revisions
yup
(distinction between product and commodity is good and other good things going on. thanks to 142.177.X.X for good recent works) |
(yup) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I like the distinction between [[product]] and [[commodity]]. This makes for a more clearly defined scope on all things material, though currently [[commodity]] is a redirect page and I think that things that are sold in commodity markets globally should be their own category ie. [[coffee]], [[sugar]], [[cocoa]] etc. | I like the distinction between [[product]] and [[commodity]]. This makes for a more clearly defined scope on all things material, though currently [[commodity]] is a redirect page and I think that things that are sold in commodity markets globally should be their own category ie. [[coffee]], [[sugar]], [[cocoa]] etc. | ||
:The distinction between a [[product]] and a [[commodity]] is basically only that of pricing on [[w:commodity markets]]. Even if something is not purchased through these markets, the price quoted on them affects all pricing on that commodity anywhere in the world - with [[transport]] costs being the only real price differential. There's a gradation here, and the idea of an [[industrial ecology]] where the [[waste disposal]] method of one process is the resource [[extraction]] method of another (!) is directly opposed to the idea of any kind of commodity market. We should think in terms of the [[service economy]] and imagine a world of high transport costs where commodity is more and more a fiction. | |||
Also reversing the linkage relation of [[campaigns]] that came to me inspired by Connelly Barnes's idea of an incredibly simple Consumerium standard wiki format seems like a good way to go. | Also reversing the linkage relation of [[campaigns]] that came to me inspired by Connelly Barnes's idea of an incredibly simple Consumerium standard wiki format seems like a good way to go. | ||
:Yup. Though we do have a fairly complex [[service cycle]] to model to get to any kind of idea of the [[comprehensive outcome]] of any process whatsoever. | |||
I'd also like to thank [[142.177.X.X]] for some great work s/he's done around here the last days. It was starting to get irritating when s/he was constantly just on a [[AWR]]-rage | I'd also like to thank [[142.177.X.X]] for some great work s/he's done around here the last days. It was starting to get irritating when s/he was constantly just on a [[AWR]]-rage | ||
:Just don't want us to go down any wrong paths. Reading the Wikipedia mailing list lately, it's a war zone over there, and when even Wales starts to use terms like [[sysop vigilantiism]] you know there's no [[due process]] at all. It won't be long now before they have to put some real [[governance]] in place, or just give up. Maybe they have enough interest and recognition to recruit that [[m:board]] now. But whatever they do it should not be our problem here. | |||
---- | ---- | ||
1.3.2004 | 1.3.2004 | ||