Wrong! The commons means knowledge takes control. For example, physics assures us that energy is neither created nor destroyed, so it is only the lack of knowledge production that makes energy finite or scarce. And I am not referring to perpetual motion machines, rather to more efficiency and automation of extraction of energy through greater innovation due to faster propagation of knowledge.
This interests me on several levels. The technical term "the commons" denotes a social organization that consisted of individualized production and no political system to coerce cooperative behavior. The concept of social control via political economy didn't exist yet. When it emerged the commons were enclosed and converted into private property and the population was reduced to bondage. We typically think of this as "the human condition" and have resigned ourselves to it's inevitability. This sort of belief is due to social conditioning and I do not share it.
If a similar organization can be restored for mass society via adroit use of technical means to defeat those who would protect rent seeking and usury with coercive force I'm all for it.
It also interests me on a cosmological and philosophical level in regard to the function of life, information, and consciousness as a physical means to degrade energy differentials in the wave function. It is in this regard that my doubts about the possibility of absolute freedom to express one's will lie.
However there is probably a way to balance the conflict between the individual and the collective and maximize what we experience as "free will" and this way is through greater understanding of the world around us and how it functions according to materialistic definitions. I think perhaps that this is what we are both after?