Re: <nettime> Google INC. vs Wisdomized Clouds

[Matze Schmidt <matze.schmidt@n0name.de>]

thx for the mail,

okay, let me pick it out: if this model is serious - we are producing
value for google by texting (in advance of google's datamining machine)
and clicking (within google's datamining machine) - it could be applied
to let's say an ordinary magazine (print or electronic):

i, the reader, would produce value for the magazine by writing text (the
forms of social text which include writings in advance of its marketing
in the magazine) and by reading the magazine. the magazine would be the
infrastructure of a producing-consuming context.

so one step closer (or more abstract, whatsoever) the structure is:

fabrication + with value -> consuming = fabrication + with even more
value

the process of real fabrication (production) is on the side of the
consuming cause there the more-value is situated!

so, couldn't the model be applied to the 'consuming itself' (the concept
of the prosumer does this in fact)? e.g. bread rolls: i (the consumer)
am producing value of bread rolls by eating them. consuming would be
producing ... strange enough.

so my questions at this point are:

* what sort of value is that concerning the model meantioned above?

* what has the model of bio-work to do with the theoretical tactics of
e.g. negri who learned from foucault?

* who or what produces value, if it is surplus value which makes profit
possible?

from the perspective of these questions the analysis model of the
prosuming seems to have deficiency. because who or what produces
surplus value within google really? or more below: what produces
google? does it produce texts? yes, but it's scripts for programms not
the contentual texts. does surplus value come out of these scripts
(code)? yes, the system of google in the www 'made out of code' is the
product and has surplus value which can be sold. the surplus value of
a magazine (an infrastructure for getting information) comes out the
same product-for-a-market made by labor (which is working-time). in a
simplified version of supply and demand: if they can't sell this roll,
there'd be none. so there seems to be still a difference between the
labor, producing the good, and the value, and the consuming.

again: is the product of google the contents (texts of the consumers)
or the informationsystem (code)?

you may say "the informationsystem is not just the code, it is the use
of it". mh, that is actually the use value n o t the surplus value.

thesis: the product of google is the informationsystem and not the
contents (besides the fact that this system affects the contents of
the content, butthat's another discussion). the theory of consumerism
alleges the opposite: google users produce the products of google,
in advance of the use and during the use. "google sells my content!"
is the blame. remember the magazine: »they sell our contents to us,
those whores«. or am i the whore when i read the stuff?

but consumers do not produce anything for google as they don't produce
anything _with surplus value_ for a magazine or a bakery. if they'd do
so, even my breath would produce value, which is only the fact, when
i have to sell it, what i do when i speak to an audience for money.
but this value can never be surplus value, since it'd be not part of
wage-labor. i only get paid by rent which is money out of a fund made
up of money out of surplus value of other more basic industries.

only wage labor (workers without owning production means and capital)
can produce the new more value (surplus) out of an old less value (raw
material, basic commodity). you never see the surplus as a woker,
don't ya?

btw. the fact that i have a ibm-laptop does not mean that this is
means of production. it is only the machine of a single producer
living from a rent, like every non productive worker.

so, long discussion-short meaning (hahe), very very simplyfied and
ssuper ketchy:

the theory of consumerism turns categories of production/product,
surplus value, wage-labor and ownership of capital around and produces
the prosumer, as a new subject. but why? is this the proliferation for
a new narration, the narration of new social opportunities within a
socialistic future already begun (negri)?

best

m

> we produce invisibly,
> by way of our very vision, by the sweat of our eyeballs.

>> hm, isn't google just a service people are paying for? paying here would
>> mean:

>> > instead of taking a few nickels out of our
>> > pockets – they use us as a »human resource«



#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org