Rachel Botsman: The case for collaborative consumption
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 авг 2024
- www.ted.com At TEDxSydney, Rachel Botsman says we're "wired to share" -- and shows how websites like Zipcar and Swaptree are changing the rules of human behavior.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers have included Al Gore on climate change, Philippe Starck on design, Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on malaria and mosquitoes, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and "Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at www.ted.com/tra.... Watch a highlight reel of the Top 10 TEDTalks at www.ted.com/ind...
here for my microeconomics homework 🙄
same girl
sameee which college were or are you in?
Same
I like her passion and idealism on the topic, and although I agree that we will soon be sing an influx of this "sharing culture", it has been 3 years since this talk and I still don't know anybody who regularly uses zipcar or trading sites. It is a great concept in theory, but hyper consumerism and the need for ownership still prevails
Sharing and access are an emerging capital and will (and largely are already) play a critical role in every sphere, from politics, to economics, to environmentalism.
Botsman's point about the gen Y's native sharing habits is eloquent and informative.
I like it. I often feel the need simplify. I want to have as little stuff as possible, but sometimes that is hard because most of my stuff I use every once in a while.
This lifestyle is cool I want to be a part of it, its fast, innovative, liberating, and more. Thank you TED.
Thanks for this. It's amazing. One of my favourites :)
@CalvinJGreen she's not talking about that, shes talking about the shift from money to trade and services. We are steering away from consumerism and steering towards socialism. but not by force, by nature. We want to work together and help each other. the middle class of this country has been forced to shift their thinking. If we get rid of money from the equation or at least keep it to a bare minimum, it can't be used against us.
Great presentation of an idea that has a potential to bring us closer to one another. I am seriously considering an attempt to implement it were I live by establishing a small network of peer to peer sharing.
Sometimes the world is a seemingly cruel and harsh place. Bad things seem to happy every moment. Sooner or later though, especially with the aid of things like the internet, i believe there will be a shift in perception. I think soon we are going to reaffirm the idea that we are not on our own, not in our rooms, not in our horrible job, not in the mundane stress infested day to day routine we call our lives. I think we'll start to see how we are all here together, sharing this great experience.
If things are being used constantly, they are being worn out constantly. Just think of how many miles you'd have on your car if it was driven 24 hours a day. And there's a reason commercial tools cost a lot more than tools for a private homeowner user. That drill is probably not designed to last through more than 15 hours of use.
While agree with her main points and talk as a whole, but I wonder how most companies would feel if we shared everything. I have a feeling they wouldn't care for it too much...
What's with the audio? (Again...)
This is a Patternist speech extraordinaire.
@MrDemonshalo True, the idea has been around for a while, but the majority hasn't quite adopted it yet.
yes cars are only used for one hour a day on average, but that one hour of usage is at the same time for most people, i dont think there is much spare capacity at peak demand, denting the usefulness of collaborative consumption
haha i loved that drill example! perfect way to get the average person thinking about stuff like this.
All very well, if a bit overhyped. I think we all know these trends are well under way. The really interesting questions though are about deflation, the future of money and the tax base as well as the monetization, and therefore production, of asynchronous dematerialized goods and services. My impression is that we don't even know how to think about this, but that it isn't going to be an uneventful ride.
It also should be pointed out that access to the sharing economy requires having something to share, as well as trivial things like leisure time and internet access. It similarly requires having sufficient motivation to offer to share, a motivation which presumably derives from the value of reciprocity. Absent redistribution that is going to leave many shareable goods out of the sharing economy and exclude many people from it. What are the social implications of this?
Surely the additional income you'll be generating from sharing (renting) out the said item/service is more than enough of a motive?
@clearmenser I think that's sort of her point. In the not so distant past, people traded with each other all the time. Growing corporations used their physical capital to monopolize shipping and advertising, in order to carve out ever larger portions of markets. This made p2p trading very difficult to sustain, in any meaningful way. Now, because CERN made the technology behind the internet open to all, we have this medium in which we can "go back to it".
@HomemdaFaina I agree. I was just trying to get a better idea of where you where coming from. Too many people are content with just treating greed as if it was the problem in of itself. Thus they don't have to look further and then possably be proven wrong. So then if I may continue the metaphor what specifically do you think is (or was) wrong with the plane?
Not once did I hear her say government should force any of this to happen, so it's clearly not communism. Socialist? Sure, but not state socialism, which is what everyone's knee-jerk thought is to the word "socialism", and which is morally wrong due to the force used. This is not state involved in the slightest, purely market. This is the good, classical view of socialism, where people voluntarily collaborate for similar goals. I'm a voluntarist and I have absolutely no problem with this idea.
This video has great evidence in support of the resource based economy proposed by the Venus Project and advocated for by the Zeitgeist Movement.
this could have been said in 10 mins, she wasted peoples time by extending it n adding the recession angle :)
peace
@SSuperCuriouss Yes, I could see a lot of copyright issues to be hammered out here. In time those issues are due to be looked at, and the laws should be changed in the interests of fairness.
Ok, if you have a hard copy of a movie you want to trade, this system will work.
However, as far as the movie analogy goes...why even buy a DVD/CD that doesnt biodegrade and you have to wonder what to do with later when you have already used it? Especially when you have video streaming online?
Ok, my point is-instead of just consuming and trying to trade it later-why not consider the ramifications of consumption before buying the product?
@grudg3y this isnt the real ted, this is a seperate one done by a public group in Sydney i think
notes
Gen Y - the Millenials (1980s and 90s) are digital natives driving collaborative consumption
collaborative consumption also driven by:
-community
-p2p social networks
-environmental concerns
-global recession
3 types of collaborative consumption:
-redistribution (swapping goods)
-collaborative lifestyle (coworking)
-product service systems (car sharing)
Zipcar took away 250 peoples’ cars, use Zipcar only when necessary, otherwise walk/bike/take public transport; after a month, 100 didn’t want their cars back!
Kevin Kelly: “where access is better than ownership”
more ted notes: kevinhabits.com/ted/
I'd like to add that the speaker claims she is a Millennial, but she's not. She's Gen X because she was born in '78. She is certainly not a "digital native", since internet access didn't become a widespread thing until she was already an adult, or almost. If I remember correctly, it was around 1995-96, or much later in poorer or less-developed areas. The whole point of a Millennial is that digital life formed at least part of their childhood. You don't get to call yourself a "digital native" if most people your age got their first email account in college.
@MedicalMarijuanaMini were talking about real working systems here, not theoretical concerns about agents maximizing utility. sure the tragedy happens, but studies have been done that show that its not a law. in fact, many studies have shown that people have a tendency to cooperate for mutual gain in many circumstances.
Okay, before this idea of "Collaborative Consumption" becomes "hip", we need a standardized system of doing the Reputation Rating so that we are able to compare not just across one particular site, but across the whole world wide web.
I'm really surprised she didn't mention ESCROW? (funds held by a third party until the buyer receives goods and is happy) This is how China does most of its business & how online megastores like AliExpress exist. Even paypal finally implemented a 'pay on delivery option' because they totally get it so kudos to them. Even scoring systems although very useful are still vulnerable. In my experience an escrow service & scoring system provides the best security for us, the consumer.
@watchmanthomas I don't get it. The video is an endorsement of the idea, not of the example. I don't have to like the things that are swapped / shared, but I love the idea. And you are wrong; change starts at a conscious level.
Excellent talk
@lassek85 I'm not sure what you're saying here, really. First off, "big oil" has seen the writing on the wall. They're actually doing more renewable energy research than anyone else. For example, BP is the world leader in high-efficiency solar cells, and make wind turbines too. Exxon Mobil is working on fuel from algae. Shell has hydrogen pumps at their gas stations (in the US anyway).
I think the consumer should choose which energy source is "best" for them, rather than some bureaucrat.
@Saerain, I agree that tangential beets round out porcine Uncle's paradigm of ankle cottons. When patchwork sorely needs the prism, my letter folds the wheel by its neigh. Thank treadle mitts glyph!
@Hamiltoni23 I was thinking exactly that. I comment here and then I can turn off my computer. I don't want to have people bothering me all day to borrow a cup of sugar, and I don't want to be bothered to have to ask them for something either. Sometimes, but not all day every day. (...except for close family, where we share because we are a REAL consumer group.) That's why we buy things.
@bowerbjo I agree, but saying "some would argue" is a lot less confrontational, my real aim was to get her to watch the AronRa video and not to just simply tell her that I think she’s wrong. That video explains the facts far better than any text comment could, plus it’s a great video, more people should see it.
In a world of limited resources, it only makes sense to share.
You could use eBay or craigslist for this stuff. But then again just don't buy so much junk in the first place. For dvds you can usually find what you want to watch online anyways.
After the last female speaker, this is a breath of fresh air. This is great! Making me consider using those services for sure - I can easily picture a community where your access to the things we consider owned now is communal and shared out well. If you based future communities' designs on this concept I could see a real effect being immediately noticeable. This is the way of the future.
@lassek85 ITER is still experimental, and there are other technical hurdles for it (its not cold fusion, and therefore all the energy is expended at once, making it more difficult to harness). There's an experimental cold fusion system under development at MIT where individual particles of hydrogen are pushed close and excited with tiny high precision lasers, but once again, they don't know if it will ever be practical. And fusion is not renewable. You still have radioactive waste...
@lassek85 In the US most wood/paper does come from tree farms. They're privately owned forests that are logged sustainably, then replanted.
I know fossil fuel consumption continues to rise, but we still haven't hit peak oil, so I don't understand what you mean by "depleting at an alarming rate" when we still have about 50 years left untapped in reserves. Ocean death I've already addressed. Privatizing the rainforests would save them too. See: The Tragedy Of The Commons (thats why they're dying)
GNU, P2P, Torrents, Wiki, forums, social media. The tech side of it has already had collaborative consumption platforms for a while now, what will take longer is entrepeneurs discovering and taking the step apply the same principles to sharable physical objects. Key is security and avalibility, and ofcause price. Many such services will depend on population density to be efficient, whereas the non-physical services needs only reliable internett access and sufficient bandwidth.
@Boodlums When the information compatible with my thoughts like colors. I run from a lot of life like her. Thanks!
this video reminded me of the awesomeness potential for creative commons
Everything about this clip seems right to me, except sharing physical objects. Renting them out, yes. Sharing them, not so much.
In an ideal world, everyone will put equal wear and take equally good care of an item, but some people will put more strain and wear and take less care of thigns than others, so people will want their own "copies" of these things so they can be taken care of and used in the way they think it should be.
P2P trust begins with checking Facebook pages, if i rent out my car i ask for the tenants facebook. that way i know everything about them and immediately understand and develop an intimacy between trades. piracy depeneds on seeds, other peers who are willing to devote personal time and bandwidth in order to allow you to download the file itself. collaborative consumption is the way forward.
@gulllars Yes, in the future items will have value inverse proportional to their ability to be digitized. New information, machines and commodities will have value, while older media/information will have to recede back to its actual low value in the scheme of things.
@agraver That takes too much time and effort. Your entire life will center around "collaboration" and putting food in your stomach. Money allows you to do whatever you want to. Collaboration requires you do what everyone else wants you to do.
I want the wallpaper at 15:30
@t3tsuyaguy1 We are neither fish nor amphibians. We are also derived from one celled organisms that doesn't mean we're one celled. If you want to talk about classification, it's best to use the names of the classes and not some fuzzy colloquial names.
We want access, not ownership. BIG TRUTH
I think that she's right about the reputation tracking stuff.
It seems like there are a couple of people here, who are browsing those pages right now, searching for her husband wanting to share her....
but guys... just because you can share it, doesn't mean you have to....
What's all this about hyperconsumption and why are we leaving production out of the equation? If my own math is correct that should be something like 50% it all. I wonder if she'll write another book when she discovers that people collaborate to produce things aswell? I really don't get what her point is beyond the fact that the internet makes barter easier. And that hardly seems like an obsevation thats worth a nearly 20 min seminar.
good talk! very impressive ideas.
@lassek85 First off, you said "zero growth ECONOMY. An economy that doesn't grow permanently would be cataclysmic to human civilization. As for my sources, the most well-known is the Copenhagen Consensus... but their findings shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who knows about the issue. We do not have the technology to avert climate change today. Moving from gas heat and cars to electric is just trading one fossil fuel for coal, and large-scale renewables isn't capable of sustaining civilization
@Hamiltoni23 I'm probably like that to a degree, despite the generation I am. I'm not interested in facebook or twitter or such things. However my hobby is online gaming and I often meet people so I can see what she is talking about when she says befriending anonymous people.
I think what needs to be clear is that these services are separate from social networking, they are mutually beneficial agreements, such as her example of exchanging the movie with someone she knew nothing about.
I don't want the cd's but I do want the vinyl. I don't want the kindle but I do want the stacks of paperbacks. But it's a great idea,. i'd love to see this set up in my neighbour hood, so i could go and borrow my neighbours tools, and they could borrow my car or space or whatever
HOW DID SHE GET A POWERPOINT TO DO THAT? I need to know. Right now.
I think there is a small chance, if she is correct, that a model such as this could lead to an increased focus on quality.
i liked the part about trading...
@Hamiltoni23
I agree with you, however, I suspect it is more likely that an abundance of negative feedback is more likely to be a deal-breaker than an absence of any feedback. Thinking in terms of ebay, I am more likely to buy from someone with 0 feedback than someone with 20% or more negative feedback.
We should not be judged by our willingness to conform, but perhaps by the negative ramifications of our actions. This then raises the obvious problem of redeeming oneself of mistakes however.
@theyetunusedname clade: a group consisting of an organism and all of it's descendants. You are member of every clade your ancestors were a member of. You are a fish. You a very specific kind of fish (homo sapians sapians), who no longer resembles your fish ancestors in any meaningful way, but you are still a fish.
Also - fish, amphibian, reptile, mammal, and many other common colloquial terms are also valid terms of taxonomy. They aren't fuzzy. I'm really not sure why you think they are.
@watchmanthomas Sorry to butt in, but way to hit the nail on the head. I don't see the confidence or independence in four women spending basically every waking moment obsessing about men.
I was recently presented with a litmus test for how "gender evolved" a movie or TV show is.
1. Are there at least 2 female characters? (central characters, not bit roles)
2. Do they speak to each other?
3. When they speak, is it about anything but men?
Yes to all three, and you have real women characters.
Somehow she pronounces the word before the big word stronger than itself. 6:20 , 6:46. makes me somehow unable to follow easily. But still great content!
It's not a new thing, we're going back to it.
very interesting ideas, but i wonder how she reconciles humans being territorial? Surely she isn't suggesting humans can move passed things like 'status'
audio fail
@lassek85 We are not depleting our resources at an alarming rate. What resource are we running out of? Most wood/paper comes from tree farms. Organic agriculture is exploding in popularity (at least for US consumers), and we haven't hit peak oil yet, despite what environmentalists keep prophesying. But what if we did? Then the price of oil would go up, recycled plastics cheaper, and more industries would move to that. Woopdie-doo. Overfishing *is* a problem though. Need to privatize the oceans.
@HomemdaFaina - by claiming capitalism is to blame, are you referring to the market? or are you including the government as well?
Interesting talk...
@lassek85 You can privatize the oceans. Its the responsible thing to do. If a person owns something, they take care of it and maintain it. If everybody owns it, everyone will grab what they can from it before someone else takes it. This is why surface fish populations are depleted, then they have to go lower and lower to get any fish, eventually destroying things like coral reefs. If sections of the ocean were privately owned, owners would do their best to ensure sustainable fishing there
@fuunguus you mean increasing efficiency by reducing waste while people are enjoying themselves? if that hurts the economy we need to rethink the economy.
@lassek85 I'm talking about ECONOMIC growth... I'm not sure what you're talking about. Growing "wealth" and "moneyflow" *is* economic growth. However, its not some conservative talking point that our chances of averting a cataclysmic climate change are more likely with economic growth. We *do not* have the tech to prevent climate change right now. Therefore, someone who's sincere about saving the planet should support pro-growth economic policies, where ecology research can be well-funded.
@MrIzzyDizzy - yes, in order to build tvp you will need to trade. whether or not tvp works or not is an unknown factor. promising something that doesn't exist yet is silly. the only way to know what will work is to test the products. until then, it's just a dream and scarcity is a fact of life.
@thisisbunk i never said money or barter was needed for tvp i believe you said " its the only way tvp could be built" as to the standard of living -anything that a multi millionaire income could have - we will have access too yes." - when you have free renewable energy and robots working 24/7 365 - there are few limits - you couldnt have a yatchs for a 6 month vacation by yourself - nor could you deliver it via barter -access will be shared to many high luxury items like yatchs
Go Rachel Botsman! Collaborative consumption is a great movement that provides options for everyone to live in ways that strengthens communities, empowers individuals (helping those that are time poor or resource poor) and in reducing our environmental impacts. NeighboursWeb is a new collaborative consumption Australian startup that is going to change the way you live! Check us out at Pozible...
@MrIzzyDizzy - seen all three. i debate this topic all the time with my friend who loves the venusproject idea and also understands my position. one of the very important differences is how we DEFINE our terms. monopoly fiat money is unjust and destructive. but sound money is what naturally occurs through voluntary trade to facilitate more complex trading. VProject won't make trade disappear, it's something people do and it is in fact the only way the venus project could be built.
Why do you need money in a ''sharing economy?'' To keep elitism? To keep power, control,...by the coorperations? The only thing what you want is to slow down consumership, nothing else.
Sure, try media sharing/swopping on the internet (thus cutting out the profit of the posting company) and you're relabelled a pirate.
I agree that collaborative consumption is here to stay but not for the stupid utopian dream of having community and "sharing" with others but mainly because it is affordable and convenient.
People (speaking in generalization and macroscopic scale) don't Uber to connect with the driver, it's because they need a ride, it's a ride-sharing service and not car-sharing service. While it's seen as economic for a car to be used by two or more persons, it fulfills only the need of the customer, while the other party driving around not because of their pure angelic intention to give people they don't know rides, but simply for the sake of gaining profits.
When it comes to sharing with strangers you need a strong motivation to do the deed (money). In this modern society with Fordism that led to mass consumption most people are raised and socialized to consume and own things. Objects help us identify ourselves, like fashion help people to express themselves. Now, it's interesting to look at the shift of ownership to access, but it's stupid to get carried away with the idea of economy based on trust of human goodness or man's concern for the good of society (quoting Sartre there)
Time to change the way that we consume, indeed.
@TonyTheSamurai Different people are driven by different levels of territoriality and status. The ones that are the most rigid will opt out of this system to their detriment. There should be enough people to make this work.
I've been mentioning this kind of concept to people for years now but big business will never let it happen. Look no further than second hand video game sales to prove this point. The second hand market is big and the game producers are losing their shit over it, even going as far as equating it to theft. When the product changed hands and was experienced by another new person they got nothing from it and this argument is becoming commonplace. And that's just simple, meaningless video games.
@fuunguus yeah, because it's doing so well now.
Well said that lady
Brilliant talk. I totally agree. But playing it out to completion this move will starve global economy built on overconsumerism, linked to the jobs we have to fuel that. So unless we revolutionise what kind of jobs the growing population does, it will be a crisis and a blessing.
Collaborative consumption would most definately exist in a totally free market, however it would not be the only form of economic trade.
I hope this is going to be an ineffective form of economic trade. I feel serious left-wing vibes from it.
very good video!
@watchmanthomas Fair enough, but Sex & the City, while stupid, is more innocuous and less viscerally unappealing than I'm guessing Carnivore Chronicles would be to a vegetarian.
See the book Accelerando by C Stross for a good example of "global reputation" scoring!
@CalvinJGreen I understand the concept of barter and that it's been round for thousands of years. the issue is that we dont JUST use money as a medium of exchange, money is used to control us. We have to pay taxes on our use of that money. If we don't have enough money we die. money should simply be a tool and it's not. It's our lifestyle. and this shift is for all intents and purposes creating a digital money. we can get paid in the products and services we need instead of getting paid in cash.
So uh...basically, trading?
Great concept, to bad it's illegal in the USA. You even have to pay taxes on your trades and the veggies from your garden.
@JeanKM1 - to be fair, i don't think fairness is the bottom-line, principal, or goal, even though it is or may often be a legitimate concern.
So what would you rather do?
@watchmanthomas you know, why those women consume that much? Definitely not because they want to spend money. But to satisfy their longings, which are much more differentiable than shoes rather than pure consumption. Who says that their longings are satisfiable only by consumption? Maybe Botsman got her idea of sharing actually *BY* watching that series? Finally, that series doesn't only communicate consume! to women, also.
@lassek85 ...from your cooling system, and the water that they get the hydrogen from won't come back. 5-10 year batteries are good and all, but that's still a landfill problem, even if it accrues at half the speed. It doesn't look like you looked up solar roadways like I'd asked. I think this is the best solution. First off, you could have electric cars that are powered by the road - small (or no) batteries req'd. And roads alone could produce 170% of America's current power consumption.
@CalvinJGreen making funny equivalences does not hide the fact that it is the root of the problem. gravity isnt to blame for a plane crash, even though if it didnt exist there would be none. Lack of maintenance, poor pilot training, poor weather conditions, all of these can be blamed for the crash. Greed, however, is at the core of the recession. But you are right, and i wasnt blaming greed. I was just saying it is the root problem. After all, greed wouldnt exist if it werent for MAN.
Very wel sayd !
@MedicalMarijuanaMini Im affraid your being too general for me to be certain I understand your point. I assume you mean that the low cost of these exchanges make the system work but the principle dosnt extend to all products. if this is your point then your invalidating your previous comment about the tragedy of the commons. because your saying that the tragedy of the commons doesn't happen in these specific systems. so why did you comment about the tragedy in the first place?