►
From YouTube: Ostrom’s Governing the Commons - Book Club Chapter 2
Description
Timecodes:
00:00 - Topics
12:50 - Reputation system
24:45 - Separate the resource system for the flow of the units
35:20 - Two problems of the commons
41:37 - Topic about firm and the state and how to deal with oportunists
47:38 - Evolution of DAOS for governing the commons
53:25 - Raffle time! And closing.
🙏 Thank you for watching! Hit 👍 and subscribe 🚩 to support this work
🌱Join the Community🌱
on Discord https://discord.gg/DDr5kYU
or say hello on Telegram http://t.me/CommonsStack
Join the conversation https://forum.tecommons.org/
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/CommonsStack
Learn more http://tecommons.org/
B
A
B
D
F
F
Oh
no
well,
I
said
hi,
but
okay
as
far
as
topics
of
the
day
go.
One
thing
that
seemed
really
interesting
to
me
is
the
the
way
the
game
changes
in
an
iterated
game
versus
a
single
shot.
So
in
chapter
one
they
talked
a
lot
about
how
the
prisoner's
dilemma
only
holds
under
a
few
constraints.
Right
players
can't
communicate.
G
B
I
also
find
interesting
like
it
when
it
says
like
there
is
some
people
who
is
at
least
in
spanish,
and
it
says
opportunists,
but
it's
the
like.
The
people
is
just
there
and
draining
the
the
things
of
the
commons,
and
I
think
she
talks
about
good
stuff
like
how
to
deal
with
that
like
and
not
how
to
deal
but
like
like.
It's
were
two
things
like
governance,
and
I
I
read
in
spanish.
B
A
So
I
thought
it
was
really
interesting
how
one
of
the
solutions
she
proposed
for
that
was
trust
and
community
building
and
angela
asked
me
a
question
the
other
day
saying
like
why.
Why
are
we
not
like
git
coin
grants?
What
makes
a
commons
different
from
a
git
coin
grants,
for
example-
and
I
think
this
hits
that
in
a
sense
of
we
need
to
build
trust
to
to
ensure
that
we
are
agreeing
to
act
in
an
interoperable
way.
C
So
I
think
that
one
of
the
things
that
the
hard
the
hard
part
about
analyzing
that
type
of
framework
and
understanding
the
problems,
especially
when
it
comes
to
the
commitment
problem,
is
understanding
what
oshram
called
a
a
credible
commitment
and
understanding.
What
identifying
a
credible
commitment
is
in
real
life,
because
you
have
so
many
different
players
and
actors
that
come
in
and
out
of
a
system
who
may
act
like
they're
committed
or
think
that
they're
committed.
F
So
I
thought
that's
kind
of
interesting,
because
you
can
kind
of
weigh
the
kind
of
axelrod
tit
for
tat
games.
Where
you
have,
you
know,
different
agents
interact
and
they
just
kind
of
learn
from
each
other,
and
then
you
can
also
weigh
the
kind
of
like
cpr
policy
thing
where,
like
everyone
gets
together
and
interacts
to
over
the
shared
resource,
to
build
the
social
capital
and
the
two
are
very
similar.
But
then
they
also
branch
out.
If
you
like,
you
know,
try
to
scale
them.
C
F
Yeah,
like,
if
you
know
about
the
chinese
social
credit
score
experiment
they're
rolling
out,
which
is
now
being
rolled
out
pretty
widely.
I
think,
essentially,
you
get
a
score.
It's
like
credit
score,
but
it's
a
social
credit
score
based
on
all
the
things
and
that
affects
the
lending
rates
you
get
where
you
can
travel
what
jobs
you
get,
how
much
your
posts
get
shown
on
various
social
networks
like
all
the
things,
so
it's
pretty
much
that.
F
So
you
have
like
the
fishermen
who
are
rolling
out
there
right
and
then
they
all
agree
like
we're
gonna
fish,
you
know
x
per
day
or
something
and
then
one
doesn't
if
that
affects
their.
You
know
their
social
score
that
might
influence
their
behavior
more
than
just
saying,
oh
well,
you
get
a
fine,
because
you
fish
too
many
fish
this
day
or
something
right
so
that
that
might
change
the
game.
There
too,.
A
D
So
I
don't!
Oh
sorry,
so
I
don't
yet
have
a
like
a
pointer
to
what
I'm
thinking
now.
So
I'm
just
gonna
riff
on
the
idea
of
reputation
and
thinking
about
you
know
reputation
as
extremely
valuable
to
a
community,
because
it
allows
you
to
predict
behavior
of
certain
individuals
and
in
small
communities.
It's
it
allowed
you
to
know
who
and
who
not
to
trust
in
your
local
community,
which
used
to
be
really
geographically
based.
D
They
were
the
right
word
for
this,
for
that
and
our
our
sense
of
reputation
now
far
exceeds
the
scope
of
our
local
communities,
specifically
the
people
that
we
maybe
depend
on
on
our
day-to-day.
And
now
our
reputation
has
sort
of
gone
out
into
I
don't
know
into
into
different
areas
and
is
used
for
different.
D
You
know
different
measures
and
a
more
you
know,
I
don't
know.
What's
what
I'm
looking
for
like
anonymous,
not
not
anonymous
but
like
unknown
stranger.
You
know
that
that
word
is
the
word
I'm
looking
for,
like
somebody
who
doesn't
know,
but
I've
seen
I've
seen.
You
know
I
might
buy
a
product
that
they
recommend,
because
I
know
that
this
person
has
recommended
other
good
products
or
other
good
books
or
other
good
movies,
or
so
it's
sort
of
you
know.
D
F
Because
if
you
don't
trust
the
system,
it
doesn't
matter
what
reputation
scores
it
spits
out.
So
for
a
large
group
of
people
to
then
use
a
reputation
system,
they
have
to
collectively
agree
to
it
to
then
for
it
to
have
value.
So
it's
kind
of
interesting
how
the
same
principles
of
the
the
smaller
common
pool,
resources
then
kind
of
scale
out
as
well,
because
you
know
you
have
to
have
a
system
that
people
agree
on
and
want
to
use
and
that
they
value
the
system.
G
G
Yeah,
this
is
quite
an
interesting
topic
and
especially
because
it
also
writes
questions
as
questions
about
how
the
collected
kind
of
data
points
on
people
can
be
utilized,
or
can
they
be
for
these
kind
of
monitoring
or
commitment
issues
right
now
you
know.
Insurance
companies
are
using
credit
scores
for
their
own
decision,
which
is,
of
course
like
problematic,
in
structure,
etc.
G
Scores
with
real
impacts
can
also
be
used,
as
you
know,
the
primary
building
tools
for
the
comments
like
again
like
imagining
some
willing
to
create
the
commons
in
their
community
and
what?
What
is
the
source
that
they
can
use
to
monitor
each
other
available
in
terms
of
reputation
score?
I
don't
think
they
need
to
design
it
from
the
ground
up.
Yeah.
F
F
Then
it
people
would
have
to
opt
into
it,
because
otherwise,
you
kind
of
have
this
like
dystopia
versus
utopia
like
drift,
where
one
is
like
the
state
where,
like
like
she's
talking
about
the
firm
in
the
state,
there's
a
single
entity
that
determines
the
rules
and
they
enforce
the
things
etc,
and
what
they
determine
is
reputations
is
the
thing
you
can
use.
So
if
you
agree
with
them
as
to
what
reputation
is
then,
yes,
you
can
use
it,
but
if
you
disagree
with
them,
then
you're
kind
of
like
yeah.
C
Yeah,
I
think
it's
just
it's
it's
very
difficult
to
when
we
put
it
in
a
framework
to
analyze
what
those
units
are.
So
if
we
were
to
take
this,
you
know
keep
going
with
this
reputation
system
what
that
reputation
is
and
the
flow
of
those
units
and
how
we
treat
the
flow
of
those
units
is
different
different
than
how
we
treat
the
entire
system
as
a
whole.
So
if
we
look
at
the
entire
system,
rod
is
right.
We
have
to.
C
We
have
to
have
a
collective
trust
in
that
system,
for
it
to
have
any
useful
utility
for
us.
However,
the
flow
of
those
units
is
just
as
important
in
analyzing
how
that
reputation
is,
is
divvied
out
to
people
and
when
it
is
divvied
out
to
people-
and
why
is
is
another
frame
of
analysis
that
needs
to
be
separated
from
the
the
system
itself
and
the
the
two
are
dependent
upon
each
other.
C
So
that
collective
trust
in
that
that
reputation
system
is
only
as
good
as
the
processes
that
we
create
for
it,
and
I,
I
just
think
that's
it's
kind
of
a
cut
and
dry
situation
when
it
comes
to
to
reputation
in
this
sense,
but
when
it
comes
to
other
cprs
and
like
the
general,
you
know,
environment
and
things
of
that
nature.
It's
a
lot
more
difficult
to
to
distinguish
the.
A
C
F
Well,
not
sure
I
mean
griff
can
practically
probably
speak
to
this
a
bit
more,
but
I
think
from
reading
through
the
common
stack
stuff.
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
things
common
stack
aims
to
to
to
help
with
right
is
to
like
say:
okay.
Well,
the
you
know,
the
management
of
this
commons
is
really
important
and
you're
gonna
need
to
have,
like
you
know,
some
general
tools,
some
like
analysis,
a
process
to
engage
in
governance
etc,
and
I
I
think,
like
with
that,
you
know,
there's
the
ideas
like
okay.
F
E
A
So
the
flow
starts
to
be
self-generated
from
that
structure
and
then
the
appropriators
can
come
and
make
use
of
the
values
that
are
being
produced
by
this
tools
and
the
system
and
this
processes.
But
I
think
yeah.
Maybe
you
don't
need
to
have
read
the
book
to
talk
about
this
point
griff.
If
you
want
to
compliment.
E
Well,
definitely,
the
making
sure
that
the
appropriators
are
placed
appropriately
in
the
system
and
that
there's
their
plan
for
is
definitely
part
of
the
common
stock
design.
Just
making
sure
that
you
know
in
the
initialization,
where
the
the
hatchers,
the
the
people
who
really
know
about
how
to
provide
best
for
the
cpr
they
are
allowed
to
enter
like
people
with
small
boats,
as
is
mentioned,
can
initialize
the
system
and
then
people
with
large
boats
that
maybe
they
don't
care
about
the
system
as
much,
but
they
still
want
to
extract
value
from
it.
E
They
can
come
in
later
and
and
still
participate
if
they
want
in
the
governance
of
this
system.
But
then,
at
the
same
time
you
know
we
know
that
the
the
bulk
of
the
governance
is
still
held
by
people
with
small
boats
that
really
care
about
the
future
of
the
commons.
At
least.
That's
that's
what
I
can
say
off
of
this
comment.
F
Yeah
and
I
think
that
ties
back
to
what
was
kind
of
talked
about
in
chapter
one,
which
is
that
for
the
system
itself
to
work
as
intended,
the
people
who
use
it
and
are
engaged
with
it
and
deeply
understand
it
need
to
be
the
ones
who
help
design
and
steer
the
the
system
and
the
process
right.
They
can't
have
just
an
outside.
You
know
organization
come
in
and
say:
okay
now,
you're
gonna.
Do
this
like
they're
generally,
like
the
map's,
not
gonna,
match
the
territory
right,
they're
gonna
miss.
F
So
you
need
the
people
who
are
actively
engaged
in
the
system
with
skin
in
the
game
who
understand
it,
who
have
deep
expertise
to
actually
help
design
it
and
help
manage
and
steer
it
and
then
chapter
two
there's
actually
also
a
part
where
she
says
a
major
source
of
uncertainty
is
a
lack
of
knowledge
and
she
talks
about
how
the
resource
system
itself
and
its
characteristics
have
to
be
established,
and
that
requires
a
blending
of
scientific
knowledge
and
local
time
and
place
knowledge.
So
you
need
both.
F
A
Okay,
now
I'm
just
going
to
say
that
a
great
advantage
we
have
in
that
point,
I
think,
is
she
says
a
major
problem
for
acquiring
information
is
how
expensive
information
is.
So
I
think
we
are
very
privileged
in
this
sense
here
of
how
there
are
so
many
people
like
actually
engaged
with
education
and
wanting
to
educate.
C
Yet
somehow
they
believe
it's
not
going
to
happen
to
them
on
the
day
that
it
occurs,
and
so
they
sit
there
and
they
you
know
they
ignore.
The
problem.
Ignore
the
problem
ignore
the
problem
until
the
day
it
does
happen.
They
say:
oh
man,
I
had
you
know
how
did
we
not
see
this
coming?
And
I
just
you
know.
I
see
that
issue
within
a
lot
of
cpr
situations
where
you
have
these
resource
systems
that
are
threatened
by
long-term
risks,
but
we
we
can't
educate
on
those
long-term
risks
very
well.
A
F
Yeah,
it's
actually
kind
of
interesting,
because
I
remember
in
chapter
two
at
one
point:
she
talked
about
trial
and
error
and
she's
like
yeah.
You
know
if,
if
there
is
like
an
unbounded
scope
or
you,
you
don't
know
the
limits
of
your
system,
you
are
learning
by
trial
and
error.
Right
like
it
doesn't
matter
how
many
models
you
have,
if
you
don't
actually
know
the
entirety
of
your
system
like
it's
trial
and
error,
and
that
means
error
error
is
inevitable
if
you're
learning
by
trial
and
error.
F
So
that
was
an
interesting
thing
and
then
I
think
a
a
little
farther
down
she
mentioned
like
yeah.
We
don't
really
have
a
complete
view
of
how
to
get
around
this
like
this.
This
is
a
really
hard
thing,
but
just
be
aware
that,
like
if
you're,
if
you
don't
understand
the
limits
of
your
system,
you
are
going
to
discover
them
via
trial
and
error.
So
yeah.
G
G
Consumption
yeah
consuming
the
commons
where
yeah
appropriation
problems
and
then
the
next
one
is
the
provision
problems.
So
the
supplying
of
the
commons
like
the
nourishing
of
the
commons-
and
I
think
that
also
relates
most
directly
to
the
digital
commons
because
they
need
like
sustaining
the
like
the
human
inputs.
Human
capital
is
the
one
that
makes
it
a
renewable
resource
that
contrasts
the
natural
resource
like
a
fishery,
and
I
wanted
to
bring
this
to.
G
Although
I
I
don't
know
much
yet,
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
take
the
education,
the
educational
course
to
cat
cat
and
how
it
stands
as
a
technology
to
address
this
kind
of
provision
problem
for
the
commons
and
maybe
like
solve
some
of
the
problems.
That
ostrom
is
mentioning
in
this
chapter,
and
I
wanted
to
ask
you
guys
or
those
evolved
with
cat
cat.
F
So
I
think,
like
cad
cad,
can
help
you
kind
of
test
out
a
lot
of
these
things.
Where,
like
you
know,
intuitively,
you
can
do
a
lot
of
like
back
of
the
napkin
like
you
know,
kind
of
rough
hand,
wavy
calculations,
but
like
this
can
help
you
cad
cad,
can
help
you
drill
down
into
a
little
more
depth
and
then,
as
far
as
circling
that
back
to
then
you
know
helping
educate
the
people
who
are
using
these
types
of
systems.
F
I
I
think
a
picture
says
a
thousand
words,
so
the
cool
thing
with
cad
cad
is,
you
can
write
out
the
code,
but
then
you
can
plot
it
and
you
can
make
a
picture
and
you
can
share
the
picture
with
people
and
see
like
look
see
it
changes
over
time.
This
is
the
good
part.
This
is
the
bad
part.
We
want
to
avoid
that.
So
we
want
to
do
this,
so
it
goes
up
in
this
direction
up
and
to
the
right
right.
So
so
yeah,
I
think
cad
guide
can
help.
E
E
Yeah,
I
I'm
a
big
fan
of
cad
cad.
I
I'm
also
a
little
skeptical
of
its
utilize
of
its
use.
Initially
for
designing
your
first
comments,
you
know,
but
ideally,
if
you
have
to
back
test
your
models,
I
mean
in
the
end
the
cool
thing
with
cad
cad
and
the
dream
of
cad
cat
is
that
you're
trying
to
take
you
can
learn
from
previous
mistakes.
You
can
take
data
from
other
models
that
already
exist
and
use
that
to
improve
a
model
that
you
already
have.
E
So
imagine
the
first
bridge
that
was
ever
built
if
someone
created-
maybe
not
the
first
one
but
the
first
model
for
a
bridge
that
was
built
that
model
probably
sucked
right
like
it
didn't
predict
a
whole
lot
of
great
things.
You
know
they
used
best
practices
to
make
a
model
for
that
bridge,
but
then,
when
they
use
the
model,
when
that
bridge
had
problems.
Oh,
why
is
there
a
crack
here?
You
know
they
can
they
can
improve
that
model
so
that
it?
E
Now
that
gets
added
to
every
model
from
there
on,
and
that
problem
doesn't
happen
to
anybody
using
these
models
to
build
bridges
and
so
for
cad
cat.
I
see
it
as
kind
of
a
similar
thing
where
for
the
first
models,
you
know
it's
kind
of
hit
or
miss
you
can
kind
of
just
justify
whatever
you
want
by
build
by
designing
a
model
that
fits
you.
What
you
want
to
say.
The
people
who
are
building
the
models
have
kind
of
an
undue
advantage.
E
I
would
say
to
push
for
their
own
agenda,
but
eventually,
when
these
models
get
a
lot
of
use
and
they
start
to
have
a
life
of
their
own
and
they
start
being
back
tested
by
data
from
hundreds
of
economies,
then
we
start
getting
something
really
useful
that
and
where
we
can
start
building
economies.
The
same
way.
E
We
build
bridges
with
certain
amounts
of
certainty,
and-
and
so
it's
a
long
term
play
for
for
me-
with
cad
cad
and
and
really
it's
a
public
good,
that
that
is
something
for
the
long-term
like
designers
of
economies.
But
maybe
the
people
who
are
using
it
now
are
really
just
you
know
it's
a
little
bit
of
they're
they're
doing
everyone
in
the
future
a
favor,
but
I
wouldn't
say
it
ends
up
helping
them
as
much
as
they
might.
A
D
B
B
A
A
A
D
B
Yeah,
I
understand
now
yeah
I
was
like.
Maybe
me
I
I
misunderstood
like
I
was
thinking
like
yeah,
like,
for
example,
we
need
like,
like
you
say,
like
yeah,
it's
like
a
first
stage
like,
for
example,
someone
do
some
something
wrong
and
it
has
to
be
punished
somehow
the
but
yeah
what
you
just
say
now.
It
makes
a
lot
of
sense
like
it's.
B
F
I
think
one
thing
that's
important
to
to
specify
here
is
that
so
at
least
my
understanding
here
is,
in
the
context
of
you,
know,
exploring
the
different
options
available.
There's,
like
you
know,
there's
the
state,
there's
the
firm
and
then
there's
also
the
commons,
and
so
you
know
running
through
chapter
two.
Essentially,
they
said
like
look
if
you've
got
agents
who
are
independently
acting,
not
communicating,
they
are
generally
gonna,
take
sub-optimal
actions
that
will
likely
lead
to
ruin
of
the
common
poor
resource.
F
F
Then
there's
the
state
and
she
explained
in
the
state
model
how
still
for
many
agents
it
actually
can
be
more
beneficial
for
them
to
be
part
of
a
state
that
achieves
some
level
of
organization
than
to
just
act
independently
right,
and
then
with
that,
though,
there
are
some
things
that
are
not
addressed
by
the
firm
or
the
state
in
which
place
a
common
pool
resource.
Could
very
much
be
beneficial
because
we
don't
have
something.
F
Different
things
are
needed
and
so
yeah,
I
think
that's
important
to
emphasize,
because,
as
far
as
I
know,
you
know
when
austrian
described
them,
she
described
them
in
the
context
of
what
they
achieve
and
she
also
described
the
bounds
in
which
they
will
no
longer
work.
So
I
think
it's
important
to
specify.
F
Another
thing
too,
I
guess,
is
that
if
we're
talking
about
kind
of
like
the
evolution
of
these
things,
daos,
you
know
decentralized,
autonomous
organizations
where
you've
got
a
you
know,
decentralized
data
store.
That's
you
know
verified
by
cryptography
of
some
sort
and
rules
that
are
enforced
by
some
sort
of
you
know,
cryptographic
code
that's
executed,
deterministically
that
can
help
potentially
expand
the
scope
of
where
these
common
pool
resource
type
things
could
be.
G
G
F
Well,
is
it
that
we're
saying
that,
in
a
situation
with
high
degrees
of
uncertainty,
establishing
reputation
allows
you
to,
then
you
know
have
like
use
leverage
social
capital
to
create
trust
to
lower
the
cost
of
doing
business?
So,
instead
of
having
to
spend
a
lot
on,
you
know
overhead
to
enforce
lots
of
things
and
design
really
complex
systems.
You
can
generally
say:
well,
I
trust
that
we're
going
to
be
okay,
so
it
lowers
the
you
know,
essentially
the
cost
of
doing
business,
and
is
that
kind
of
what
we're
pointing.
B
B
D
E
G
A
Meanwhile,
you
guys
are
looking
for
it.
We
have
five
minutes
left
and
it's
time
to
raffle
the
pen.
So
let's
see
who's
gonna
be
the
the
big
winner
and
we
can
yeah.
We
can
close
this
session
just
so.
We
finish
on
time,
because
last
time
we
passed
a
little
bit
of
the
hour
and
thank
you
so
much
for
everyone
joining
so
two
things
that
I
wanted
to
do
before
we
go.
One
is
raffle
the
pen
and
then
second
is
decide
who
is
gonna?
A
A
D
B
B
A
B
G
G
A
A
C
B
B
If
we
separate
and
yeah,
we
can
focus
more
and
it
will
be
better,
and
I
also
think
that
would
be
super
interesting
like
I
don't
know,
if
that's
possible
but
like
if
we're
reading
during
the
week,
and
maybe
through
the
chat
of
the
of
this
discord,
we
we
can
also
like
change
like
the
things
we
are
interested
in,
and
so
we
are
more
prepared
when
we're
talking
here
and-
and
that
would
be
awesome.
I'm
going
to
I'm
going
to
do
that
for
sure.