Subject: Organis design submission -- Proposed draft

From: Gerry Gleason <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 11:17:41 -0600

Below is the draft I said I would attempt.  There are some inresolved 
bits at the bottom where I wasn't clear what was intended, but I made an 
attempt anyway.

Gerry

Organis Design -- Waking the Planet

Organis is a set of design rules and organizing principles that will
begin to realize a digital operating system for Spaceship Earth.
Physically, Organis is a network of individual geographically dispersed
Micro Cooperative nodes and a (hyper functional) micro kernel business
organizational system.  Each node encompasses both physical
computational farms which are linked together with the global Internet
to form a resilient and powerful grid computer, as well as a social
organisational cell.  These organizational cells provide the physical
support to enable individual members to contribute human capital to
building Virtual Networked Organizations (VNOs) which are the organs of
Gaia's emerging personification.  VNOs are dynamic decentralized
adaptive digital social structures that are self-regulating and capable
of producing very complex and reliable digital products and services.
In contrast to typical business structures, VNOs are organized to
support communities of users and to sustain communities of authors
in addition to providing profits to owners and investors.  In fact, many
VNOs will be non-profit associations, and as such, monetary profits are
managed to sustain the organization's mission and provide fair
renumeration for contributing authors and other workers, but just as
important are the community based ethics of digital freedom, human
rights and environmental sustainability.

This is a truly radical proposal based on an emerging scientific and
theoretical paradigm that begins to address the most complex problems
of many disciplines.  For many years these problems remained on the
fringes of many fields, not because they aren't critical to explaining
many fundamental things, but because the complexity of the solutions
were beyond analysis with current mathematical tools.  The essence of
the new paradigm is that even seemingly very simple systems can exhibit
very complex behavior, and that once a certain threshold is crossed,
there is an equivalence to computation.  The really surprising thing
is that once the threshold is crossed, all such systems can be
considered equivalent in a fundamental way, which is to say that we
can expect exactly the same structures and relations in physical,
biological systems as we find in computational theory and mathematics.
The theoretical work of Turing and Church on the fundamental
equivalence of all "sufficiently complex" computing structures is the
same as the idea that all math can be reduced (theoretically) to basic
arithmetic systems, and therefore the insolvability of the general
halting problem is exactly the equivalent of Goedel's incompleteness
theorem from math.

Although the formal proofs of the most important conjectures of the
new paradigm are probably still well in the future, the work so far
makes a compelling case for some pretty bold claims.  If simple
cellular automatons can exhibit computation, it's not much of a
stretch to imagine that simple physical systems can compute as well.
Since emergent complex behaviors can be found in all systems once
they cross the chaos threshold, this is quite suggestive that all
the complexity we see in physical and biological systems arises the
same way it does in any computational system.  Theoretically, there
is no longer any need for divine intervention, as simple computation
can give rise to a whole hierarchy of more and more complex system
behavior based on emergent levels of organization.  Not to rule out
the divine, but to suggest that the divine emerges as the highest
levels of organization, possibly well beyond what we can access, at
least in any rational sense.

In the past, science has been blind to the idea of Gaia because at
its base is a simple set of rules and independent agents that
produced Gaia.  Gaia is basically a very large Cellular Automata
computation that is evolving.  Gaia can not be predicted, but it
can be simulated.  The new science has linked forever complex
biological growth patterns and evolution to simple sets of rules
underlying organic growth.  Natural history is the story of
Gaia's emergence as a sentient but largely unconscious being, and
human history is the story or Gaia waking up and becoming
self-aware.

We are proposing that a network of VNOs built on a foundation of
MicroCo-Op cells operating under simple sets of organizational
rules are the natural structures to effect this step in planetary
evolution.  The rule sets that promote growth by expanding
knowledge and awareness throughout the physical and social
networks are to be determined by trial and error.  Although all
paths should eventually lead to good solutions, there can be a
wide variation in efficiency and effectiveness, so we don't
intend to run completely blind experiments.  For example, we
expect that there is an optimal size for the MicroCo-Ops in
the 1-26 person range, and further growth should be by
replication, not growing larger.  Also, the three pillars of
the GGPL agreement (free software, human rights and environmental
sustainability) need to be implemented as binding agreements
between entities.  Global Openness and total transparency of
transactions would be common operating practice for all VNOs.
This list in not exhaustive, of course, details and evolution
to be determined by democratic action of the stakeholders.

The Virtual Networked Organizations (VNOs) are organistic trans-human
digitally networked cellular business structures whose sustainability is
based on the creation of charters for novel non-profit Micro
Cooperatives (MicroCo-Ops) business entities geographically grouped in
computational farm grids.   VNOs allow any number of geographically
dispersed MicroCo-Ops of knowledge workers to virtually collaborate
on a project with planning, roles and structure emerging directly
from the cellular operations of the networks of participants.  For
many various central areas of focus, the roles of co-ordination and
management arise from any of the project knowledge workers based on
level of knowledge and  interest.  The definition and recognition of
the operations of VNO structures are based on the case studies of the
Linux Project done by George Dafermos.

CompuFarms (CF) the physical equivalence of the VNO type structure is
being envisioned and developed in Japan by Carl Sundberg.  CF  is the
large geo-political grouping of MicroCo-Ops that form a peer to peer
computational farming grid nodes for various types of active data
repositories, disaster recovery resources, and for government, financial
and scientific simulations.  The data storage and computational
resources provide one source of income for the MicroCo-Ops.  MicroCo-Ops
would also provide digital services for local government and educational
institutions.

The novelty of the proposed VNO MicroCo-Ops based on the Greater Good Public
License agreement is that the VNO/CF MicroCo-Ops create the necessary
local micro business structures providing each each person who is an
active member of the Geo-positioned MicroCo-Ops cells with the
communications, computational and financial resources needed.  The
VNO type Linux Projects, would still be based on voluntary participation
in a matrix type of management where the local resources and employees'
pay is removed from the VNO projects and they would continue to operate
as they currently do, but achieve a level of sustainability that is not
available because of their current voluntary nature.

MicroCo-Ops growth will be based on transformation of services from
analog to digital and by cellular replication.  MicroCo-Ops upon
reaching a certain size of I/0 and resources  will temporarily swell its
number of personnel and then divide or reproduces itself in various and
complex ways based on a set of simple rules governing its behavior and
particularly MicroCo-Op interactions with each other.

NanoCorp or MicroCo-Ops rule base / founding charter.

1. They are based on physical and Geo-location, rooted in the
   local community.
2. The limiting size factor for personnel is 1 to 26.
3. The limiting I/O factor is based on local costs and markets, with
   I/O defined roughly based on the sizes of the value flows involved in
   the  transactions.  That is, resources given for a measured amount of
   service provided, human capital costs vs local cost of living,
   external costs (e.g. access to global Internet), and finally the
   size of savings (opportunities) and total value of the cell
   (capacity*savings).
4. Payment of personnel is based on local wages and benefits.  Payment
   amount also based on I/O contributions as a performance incentive.
5. They subdivide into separate organizations.  To prepare for division,
   all critical services and roles must be replicated, which means you
   should always be training your backup/replacement.
6. The "daughter cells" should have a balanced set of physical resources
   from the parent cell, and all of the information (genetics).  The same
   for the "relationships", where both have all the contacts but where
   relationship roles involve services contracted these would be
   divided.  Resource and role division doesn't have to be symmetric,
   particularly if the two offspring are intended to have a different
   focus.  Diversification is also based on enabling different "genes"
   in different cells, which is based in a large part on the
   differential skills and specialization of the individuals in each
   cell (interests too, of course).
7. Supporting people is primary -- The needs of people should be at
   the center of any design, and this design is all about creating
   systems of organization that effectively support their individual
   members.  If they thrive, the whole network thrives, and growth can
   be maintained by adding new members.  To make this effective, the
   primary responsibility of the network is to support the career goals
   and planning needs of its members by guiding them through a series of
   learning/working experiences designed both to make them successful
   and productive with work matching their current experience and with
   challenges that expand this experience without causing frustration
   by being beyond their current capabilities.  A variety of experiences
   are available with the network, because the boundaries of the
   MicroCo-Op cells are permeable allowing for personnel to move
   between roles to satisfy both individual career/learning goals as
   well as satisfying the need to deliver services and maintain the
   vigor of the MicroCo-Op cells.  This suggests another reason to
   always be training your replacement is so you can move to a new
   role, possibly in a different cell far away (network-wise) and
   continue your career path.  Movement between cells is good for
   the network and to be encouraged.
8. As a non-profit they must achieve their goals by not growing larger
   in size, but by their reproduction. However at the same time they are in
   competition with each other to provide services under GGPL at
   continually better effectiveness (in achieving GGPL goals).

VNOs rule base / founding charter

1.  Globally connected network of MicroCo-Ops and NanoCorps.  Location
    is nowhere and everywhere.
2.  Mission focused:  Limited by global attention potential of the
    mission space.
3.  I/O factor is the sum of the Micro/Nano-Orgs.
4.  Transparency principle for all financial arrangements and transactions.
    The VNO should facilitate transactions with MicroOrgs more than actually
    participate.  Any overhead functions can be funded from transaction 
fees.
5.  Needs to support replication/division in cells
6.  Maintains the Virtual Roof containing the Genetic Repositories.
7.  Actively promote individual careers by dissolving cell boundaries in
    searching for opportunities.
8.  Non-profit, growing by increasing market attention and organically
    growing a service network to keep pace.  Membership based on GGPL
    adoption.

The proposed rules attempt to develop computer organizational growth
models, that exhibit both continuous sustainable growth through
transformation and replication and complex unpredictable random
behaviors necessary to realize the hyper functional organizational
qualities including decentralize control, self-organizing, dynamic
response, and efficiency as witnessed in the Linux Project and appears
to be occurring with other Libre Source projects.

[ I would like to do more with this next part, but I'm not sure I understand
  the points well enough from the original.  ]

Our aim is to simulate "the state of nature", The Garden of Eden.  To
find a set of simple "natural rules", genetic code or programing that
represent combinatorial solutions worked out over centuries stemming from
the laws of physics of matter that express themselves in  complex
biological systems with no central control system.  The "natural rules"
and resulting self-governing and self-replication of biological
structures of genetic code really have  no parallel to any other
human social structure other than the Linux Project.

The type of non-centralized control evolution and development of
biological growth based on genetic blueprints and physical law as that
respectively can not be broken or can not be easily changed because of
the many levels of interactive complex behavior does not seem to have
any thing in common with anarchy nor libertarianism.  The "natural
rules" are simple, but exhibit high level both locally and globally of very
controlled highly organized codes boundaries and interactions, that
represent sets of various solutions for a given set of physical
boundaries and indeed rules that cannot be broken and leave very little
choice for a given life form.

[ Below is an attempt at replacing the above two paragraphs ]

The structures and starting rules that are proposed here are intended
to build on the success factors that have developed naturally for
Open Source development, and we claim that the essential character of
OS project organization is anarchy.  As a political/intellectual
movement, Anarchy as probably the most pure form of Libertarianism, but
forget any associations you may have with the idea of creating anarchy
in communities or societies by throwing bombs and other disruptive acts,
since these are both factually incorrect, and have nothing to do with
what Anarchy advocates.  The correct association is of anarchy with
"a state of nature", the Garden of Eden, if you will.

Humans, being highly social animals with highly advanced systems for
communication of symbolic knowledge, have the ability to impose rules
of all sorts on this original state.  In principle, there is nothing
wrong with this, but history shows many examples where "the rules"
become highly oppressive.  In tribal societies, the social unit is a
small group where social "norms" can operate effectively, and it can
be argued that the "norms" are essential for the survival of the tribe,
but human development did not stop there. With the development of
agriculture, the stage was set for creating hierarchical structures,
monetary systems and large scale warfare (i.e. beyond inter-tribal
conflicts for territory).

The rapid evolution and success of the Linux Project and OS development
generally suggests that the structure and organization of these
projects is based on having found the natural rule sets that well match
human social and intellectual capabilities.  These rules are rooted in
genetic blueprints and physical laws that respectively cannot be
broken or cannot be easily changed because of the many levels of
interactive complex behavior that are linked, but they are most
definitely not imposed by a central authority.  The "natural rules"
are simple, but exhibit high level both locality and global emergent
behavior based on very controlled highly organized codes, boundaries
and interactions, that represent sets of various solutions for a given
set of physical boundaries and indeed rules that cannot be broken and
leave very little choice for a given life form (or natural
organizational structure).

[ End replaced section ]

We envision the Organis to be a business model by which payment for
development and services can be introduced to the Libre / Free Source
Projects without disturbing the above mentioned organisational
qualities.  It is our hope, that a digital based type of "hyper
fictional micro kernel structured" :-) earth operating system can be
created that will have the capabilities to compete with and dissolve the
large inefficient global corporate structures.  NanoCorp or MicroCo-Ops
entities who rather than merely express a "code of ethics
duty/obligation" for the greater good of the public, actually provide
legal binding agreements as a non-profit entity to provide a real
services locally promoting digital freedom, human rights and a
sustainable future for all.