From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Subject: Singuarity 0.3: Information as Capital
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:46:57 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

As a result of the discussion of information-as-capital,
I've started thinking about whether we might not consider
that what makes capital capital is its information content.

For example, if I survived by gathering and got the idea
that seeds produced plants which produced more seeds, I
might separate my seed store into two parts, one for
consumption and one for planting.  The later could be
considered my capital (stuff used to make more stuff).  But
what happened when I divided the seeds into two parts was
that I _added_information_ to the seed store.

I have already described how ore and other raw materials
become a lathe, or other machine tool typically thought of
as capital, through the addition of information.  In fact,
at this point I can't think of a case in which the formation
of capital is not just the addition of a certain kind of
information to materials of various kinds, including
information itself.

Consumables, on the other hand, participate in entropy; they
eventually lose information, turning into heat, water vapor,
carbon dioxide, sewage, garbage, and the like, but without
(usually) producing more information elsewhere.

In any case, I've looked at the objections to the first step
of my singularity theory, "Information is capital," and I 
continue to think this a reasonable assertion.  I hope those 
of you who still disagree with this assertion will 
nevertheless come along for the ride, suspending your 
disbelief long enough to criticize some of the subsequent 
steps.  (And thanks for the mail on this, by the way.)

Now, if my theory of an approaching political singularity due 
to the proliferation and exfoliation of capital holds any
water, it's clear that not only must information be an
important form of capital but it must be to a large extent
fungible.  If that is not the case, the bourgeoisie could
maintain their position by abandoning control of
informational capital and concentrating on some other
crucially needed items -- land, police power, rare raw
materials, roads and other transport systems, specially-
trained personnel.

The way this would work out in practice is: the price 
(exchange value) of information would fall to nearly zero, 
whereas the items through which control was to be
maintained would rise in price until they could be obtained
only by large corporations and the rich.  In spite of the
conspiratorial sound of this process, no conspiracy is
actually necessary; that's the way capitalism works already.
(If it were not for the disturbing effects of technological
evolution and political upheaval, the tendency of the rich
to get and the poor to lose would long since have caused
capitalism to revert to a state approximating feudalism.)

So what critical needs can we think of, which information  
could neither meet nor find a substitute for?  And can a
ruling class get all of it under sufficient control to
maintain its rule?  Would they be able to do this before
adverse political reaction frustrated their project?  If 
such a form of needed capital can be found, then informa-
tion would _not_ be fungible with respect to that form
and presumably its controllers could continue to maintain 
economic and thereby political and social dominance by 
controlling that form of capital.
-- 

 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Xref: sparky talk.politics.theory:5505 talk.politics.misc:64701