Re: nochmal Gebrauchswert | war: [ox] Werthaltigkeit von Informationsg...
- From: "Franz Nahrada" <f.nahrada reflex.at>
- Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:27:55 +0200
liste oekonux.de schreibt:
But we can add to this list forever. Is it worth doing?
well it is - if we are systematically interested how to understand the
difference of "Gebrauchswert" and "usefulness" ( I now take the
correct entgish Term because here the German language is less
clear as we have found out in our private discussion)
The list would then be an incentive to draw the lines between
form of commodity (incl.Gebrauchswert) and the concrete design
of products.
We would learn that there is no neutral "Produktivkraft".
- product has to be a commodity. Example: Russian work on bacteriophages
which can target specific bacteria (so, no problems with resistance as
with antibiotics). Usefulness depends entirely on being not mass produced
but bred for one specific outbreak of disease, therefore abandoned with
end of USSR.
That means a lot of production which is useful is not happening because
the industrial production based on mass- copying. The "flooding" (Ulrich
Sigor)
kills meaningful products en masse. Here it is even an analogy: antibiotics
kill masses of more meaningful "species" of products.
see last example.
- products which cannot be repaired but must be thrown away when faulty
(almost all modern electronics). Repairability is part of nutzlichkeit,
has no gebrauchwert ;-)
Unless Repairability is "the Gebrauchswert" itself. Repairability can be
marketed.
then again we have this question of transition mode versus systemic mode.
- (also relevant to Utopische Klo): modern british toilets
have flat tops, so they fit together in a warehouse when stacked. In
use, urine stays on the flat surface and leaves a stain which needs to be
cleaned. Usefulness in production has taken priority over usefulness to
the purchaser.
Its not the "usefulness in production" but the "usefulness in
circulation", or rather the
"costs of warehousing" reduction. The same goes for meet: hormones, fast
breeding, shorter
production. Then it should last at least 14 days in the shelf - more
chemicals added
for both things. One could say "Gebrauchswert destroyed" or "Thats
Gebrauchswert".
- products designed not to be understood by users (if a mystery can be
sold for more), making user innovation and understanding impossible
That is the dependence mode of production. Selling support with the
product. It is
masked as "useability". Something very relevant to the flaws in IT
development.
In reality, its stealing life-time.
- products only designed for large enough markets. So it is not possible
to buy computers which resist high levels of humidity (eg parts of Africa)
for long periods.
That is where the the end of Capitalism comes from:
Only with very large capital nowadays it
is possible to successfully produce commodities.
So more and more people understand that there is a different
mode of production which needs no capital or almost no capital: ours.
The costs of development shared, the costs of production in small series
becoming affordable again: thats GPL-society.
Maybe GPL society will begin to rise in Africa??
etc etc.
If you seriously think making such a list is a good idea, a wiki or
somewhere more permanent would be better. We would need some convention
for how abstract or concrete the list should be?
I think we should try to include Ulrich Sigor and make an opentheory
project out
of it. Or when I have time I can browse through his texts because he has
done a lot
of thinking about categorizing the destructive sides of
Gebrauchs-wert-bestimmung.
All in all it brings life to what sent you privately:
The notion that Situationists are right when they say that commodity
production is
a "spectacle", not a sufficient production!!
Franz
________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.de/
Organisation: projekt oekonux.de