 This is the build OGM call for November 2nd, 2021. I've got, let me find which layer of the diagram best suits because it does help do that, but I think I need more, yeah, Mark, that's one. Actually, probably this one. So I'll make our back-end screen share. So this is one of five, I think, if not six, six layers. And I think there's a couple more layers brewing that I haven't drawn yet of the mosaic. And the mosaic, so Stacey, you've seen this before, right? Yes, but I... You could use a refresher. Yes. Okay, Mark and Mark Antoine, is this familiar to you? No, and Mark Antoine, I can't see you. I should hide myself. This is meh, Mark Antoine. Meh. Mark Antoine is so expressive sometimes. Okay, so let me explain. I drew a bunch of layers. Consider this a multi-plane camera view of the mosaic. And a multi-plane camera is how they, how Disney invented creating cartoons. They basically actually had what would look today like a drying rack for figs and apricots, sort of, you know, multi-plane layers. And then in each layer you would drop in a cell and then you could update each of the cells and move the animation forward. And then you had a camera up on top of the whole thing and you shot through this thing. And that gave you a really primitive perception of depth, but it also let you separate character animations from background motion from other objects. So just sort of borrowing that and saying, hey, here's a view of what OGM, what the view is from OGM's mast. And so there's a series of entities. Here at the top it says the view from OGM's mast. Here's kind of OGM as the bigger blob and it has weaving the world, which is feeding the big fungus. Here's massive human intelligence project and massive wiki with the possibility of creating context weavers as a guild. And then the sort of shared space out toward the middle and again, this is just a first pass drawing, but there's sort of this generative commons idea that the big fungus lives inside the generative commons. And then there's other entities like trove and factor and climate web and community food systems and topic quests and dig life up on the far right, the wise democracy pattern language, liberating structures pattern language, Jamie Joyce and the Great American Debate and the society library. These are all entities that are nearby that are passing through that have been part of our conversations that are interested in the same kind of vision, but that each would have its own mosaic. Like ideally this would be a fruitful metaphor for lots of entities to describe layers of their activity. Then there's a layer here of participants, which is humans, which maps to these organizations. So I am over the middle of OGM, Pete is over the middle of massive, et cetera, et cetera. And we kind of go through here. So these would normally be laying inside of the entities, except it's really useful to separate them. And also importantly, some of these humans are involved in many, many, many of these entities, right? So Pete is involved in Plotilla and he's got ventures with this person, that person. Those would be kind of entities would be, there's also a sub layer of projects, right? And the projects here are at least at the point where I drew this on the 29th of August, I guess. The projects are tiles in some sense. And these are larger than tiles. These are kind of, a tile should be a small, hey Hank. A tile should be smaller than a large project. It should be a piece and hopefully it's multifunctional. But for example, here's the Opal massive web front end. And that's a project that I think Pete was scoping that would also greatly benefit OGM and whoever else wants to use massive as a wiki. And then I can describe what each of these is, but each of these is kind of a larger view. Then there's kind of infrastructure that we use. And this is kind of the visual story of the mosaic. I think this is the closest these diagrams get to a picture of a desired future, which is a series of events happen over time. So you could envision the diagram in the upper left here with time is the little t. And then each of these lines is, for example, the top line could be weaving the world podcast episodes where each of the circles is an episode, is a nugget. And then that nugget down here gets turned into a video with transcripts, with clean links, with metadata, all of which Pete is basically working on a tile that will take the message that comes from Zoom that says, hey, you've got an audio file, the video file, the text file, and maybe a transcript, or maybe not a transcript, and do a whole bunch of magic with it and put it in public stores in a way that is value enhanced. Now, we then turn, and we then turn through a variety of arcane mechanisms, these raw materials into their... Could we stop at that video tile for just a second? Yes, please. So I am attempting to, with limited success, connect with one of my team members who basically runs video at the internet archive. Your audio is not quite coming through to us. I don't know what... Interesting. Yeah, there. Huh, that's weird. Go ahead. I did invest in this nice little... I think it's so directional that you need it closer to your mouth. Yeah, or maybe it's not that mic. Or maybe you're not connected at the right mic. Snap your finger right in front of the mic. Check. It is not that microphone. It is now this microphone. Oh, my God. Oh, my God, it's now it's like you crawled inside my head. Okay. Apparently, the new mic is working well. It's technology and the human limitations when we come in contact and interface with technology. It works, it works really well, Mark. You have a voice for radio. I got this little book, which I found on the street. Put your money where your mouth is. How perfect is that? Insider's Guide to Learning, Incoming, and Career and Voiceovers. So we will just watch the... Not watch the skies, but watch the gutters. This was the universe looking out for you. I like that. Okay, back to you in the booth. We shall see. Oh, perfect. So yeah, one of the... I know we have a bunch of tools for video and there's a incipient project where so many people are doing Zoom calls and how do we basically take quotes from the Zoom calls and add metadata and basically create these digital things that people can share in many different ways and how do we host them? How do we index them? That's a nascent interest and I'm attempting to work on it. Perfect. And you're totally on the task here. That's exactly what we're looking at. And very likely, lots of people are trying to solve this problem, so yes. And we'd like to solve it in a shareable way that gets put in the comments to make a contribution so that everybody's like, oh, awesome. Here's the Enrich Your Transcript package. Stacy. That's the part that I thought could be gamified. And what do you mean by that, Stacy? What I mean by if we set up some system where we... And again, we can discuss how it gets because I know people don't like the idea of prizes but some way to distribute whatever funding there was for that and people... And again, everything could be set up depending on how we decide but where people could self-organize and work in teams and maybe we get six different edits of one call and we decide which one we wanna use or maybe there's only one because everybody decides they like the same way it's going. But you know how, so that education call that I went to with you, Jerry? Exactly the way they're setting that up is how I think education should be set up. You know, there's like the brainstorming and you get something for putting out those ideas but you could also work together and you're working as a team. So that's what I mean because what that would also do is get us to know each other better because now we're working together. We're hearing different ideas. It's automatically gonna happen. And then of course you're gonna wanna watch what was created and we could also bring it down to behind the curtain. That's what I'm calling the muggles now. They're just the people behind the curtain. And we can have them watch and they can decide what they like and we could get feedback and input and maybe they'll start discussions. I know when these calls start coming out I was gonna ask you or if it's okay I definitely would like to have a Facebook page where I have these where maybe I can get some conversation going. And I think there's not that there is some but there's not that much difference between challenges and prizes and a bunch of other things like that. So gamification is about I think the systems design of the dynamic we're talking about and we can come right back to it and Pete has something to add to that. Yes, and it's not about gamification but rather the kind of the encapsulated version of the of a call. Would it be okay if I did like a two minute to entail of where I'm kind of at with the last call? Makes total sense. Do you want me to complete this diagram or do you want to do that right now? Let's do it right now because I think it's exactly where we are. Yeah, yeah. By the way, I might be using the wrong word when I say gamification. I'm just going to say that that's just I don't know if I'm using the right word but to me it's like playful thing. Yeah, yeah, it's working for us and play is hugely important. Totally agree. I think gamification is the right word. Okay. I think maybe personally I've never been super excited about. I actually really do enjoy play but not games if that makes sense. I like serious games and very serious games. Yeah. And in a sense, what's that? No, sorry, there's a few different meanings to the word gamification. Yeah, yeah. And there's certainly the one where it's about getting points, which I think is stupid but getting immediate feedback on your actions I think is actually the very important good idea of gamification. Cool. Yeah, totally agree. So let me, so let me on the screen here. There we go, all yours. So I was in, well actually maybe let me show my screen first and then I can start talking. This is Obsidian and the subject is last Thursday's OGM call. And what I did is I took the transcript, the recording and the transcript and the Zoom chat and started playing with it. And I was, so this is the Zoom chat. I was inspired by Eric's comment here towards the end of the call. How do we post process video and make it a resource for the future reference? So in thinking about that a little bit and obviously I've thought about this a lot, I again challenged myself, hey, why don't I do that? Take a little bit of time and do that. And so this is the output of that. I think of it as a hypertext workbook. So, and I noticed when I scrolled to the Zoom chat a couple times and the rough transcript a couple times. This is just a computer recognition, voice recognition of the whole call. And in the tool that I was using the script, it actually syncs with the video so I can scroll to a place and click go. It turned out that that was kind of less useful than I thought it would be. And the script is a wonderful tool and amazing and you can edit this live and it changes the video, which is definitely useful. In this case, it wasn't as useful for me because this is a really long call an hour and 15 minutes and around 20, 25. And scrolling through this and the script kind of gets bogged down. So I ended up using this transcript and just looking at this time code and then using a video player DLC to do the same thing, get to the right spot in the video and listen to something. So scrolling through the Zoom chat and kind of looking at the stuff that got talked about here and then scrolling through this transcript and looking at the stuff that got talked about here. I clustered things into books and organizations and people and resources and topics. It's easier to see those right there in this view. But let me show you, here's a link to the books that I heard in the call and here's a link to the organizations I heard in the call and the people we talked about and mixed in here are also the people who were on the call. So if I go back to this homepage, I made a list of the attendees. So let me open these up a little bit and then poke through these a little bit. And you made a whole new vault for this project. So we're in a separate obsidian vault which is kind of a separate project. And I think of it, so I'm still maybe looking for the word for that, but I picked workbook. I've started a little, I've started a little pop page for this and I'm calling it a hypertext workbook. And you do things with this, like you use backlinks and search and graph visualization and you, someplace like that. And what you do with it is you navigate and edit this workbook. So you can see this as a website, but it's not quite, it doesn't have the things that obsidian does. So obsidian is a better view. Let me turn on another pane here too. This is the backlinks pane. This one isn't very interesting. It just says that this call-a-phone is linked from this page. But if I click something a little bit more interesting like Ted Nelson. So this started to be the things that we talked about and this is a couple people talking. This is Jerry talking. I think this is Eric talking. This is me talking. And to get these little snippets of text, what I did is literally copied and pasted from the transcript and pasted into here. In the next version, I probably would be a little bit more inclined to include the person who's talking here. I didn't in this case because it messes it up it's easier to read it if it's just this. If I had a way to turn on and off speakers, speaker labels, I would probably do that. Oh my God. Yeah. Yeah. I'm a little bit constrained by my choice of tools and technology, but I still like this tools and technology. But you can see here that this page is linked to from the page about the book. It's linked to because Ted is a person. Ted is also linked to PasaPlex. So immediately I'm seeing that there's a couple things that are interesting with respect to Ted. He's also linked, somebody Gil was talking about. He wanted to say inter twinkled and complex problem. So on the planning and plans page, there's a link to Ted Nelson. So and actually maybe this is a good time to click over to that. So I'll close this because it's a little distracting. I'm playing around with bolding stuff because the big part of this call was planning and plans. So this one accrued more speaking than the Ted Nelson one, for instance. And there's so much here that I started to try to pull these, how do you plan an amass, how do you make a map in a storm? As soon as you say problem, people think solution. Solutions are fine for discrete problems, but not for messes. There's the Ted Nelson thing. And so this is maybe a better demonstration of a collection of the text of the call. And you can kind of imagine having people in here would make it a little trickier to read. This bold thing, I'm not perfectly happy with it. It starts to pull out the highlights of it, but maybe I do that differently in a sidebar or something with just those. So the other thing I'm starting to play with is hashtags. Obsidian has good support for hashtags. They're kind of like links and they're kind of like hashtags. In the olden days when we used to have paper books, these are kind of the words that you would highlight in an index. So I just started doing that, but you can see, I've got an index based on words. So feminine, what's that about? It's this. And it's funny, this is something that Grace said. And I Googled Heather Hines and I had no idea what that was or what that was. Yeah, I wasn't able to find that either, but at least now, this is a place where I could go back to Grace and say, hey, Grace, what's helpful is in. So this is a place where I see a connection that I could make. And Peter, just a tiny aggression, but I think important. If you get your transcript from Zoom, which has an order deal, the transcript shows up with speakers identified because their integration with order is really good. So order sees the different channels and already knows the name of who's on the channel because it's Zoom that they're talking to. And what Peter's doing is a separate translation, separate speech-to-text translation of all this that doesn't really get speakers well. And so on these pages, these are different speak, like the privacy of money is several different people saying these different statements. So it's unclear who said what, which also means you can't, you don't know to go back to Grace on that statement to ping her. So having people would be pretty useful. It was a conscious choice in this. It didn't have anything to do with the script. It was a conscious choice to try to. Just go to the text? No, convey the sense of the call rather than make it about the people. You know, one of the things you can kind of observe that a call has, you know, a rhythm and a flow. And I think one way of thinking of an OGM call is it's as a group brain, right? It's a group thinking this. One or the other person is speaking the words of the group, but, you know, over individualizing it kind of detracts from the groupness of the call. As I said before, I think to do this again, I would probably keep speakers in here. And so in a future rev in a more advanced world, you could actually maybe turn on and off the speaker names and you could also then follow back to the speakers and a sentence would retain its attribution even as it was further cited and backlinked, et cetera. Yes. Also, I believe there's some AI that will do sentence summarizing or highlighting. So there could be in a future rev, there could be some AI that flows in and does the bolding as you just did manually because that was a lot of, you did a lot of manual editing to show us what was important in this page, right? And all of it. Yeah, I'm a bit skeptical. I don't think I would not want an AI to do the highlights on this. Yeah, yeah. I, you know, specifically this is human curation and human sense making. And it was me saying, you know, actually a lot of plans is maybe something a computer would, you know, that's like, I don't care about that. There's a conversation to be had, I don't care about that. How do you plan in a mess? Damn, that's cool. How do you make a map in a store? Damn, that's cool. And, you know, I'm into doing that in person. So one of the things I did there, I was at this, I happened to know that this topic is related to, Grace was saying this at the same time she was saying really smart stuff about the primacy of money. So what I demonstrated there, and you'd probably have to go back to the video to see it. This is, when I'm looking at this thing, it's not, it's a workbook, right? It's something where, you know, conceptually to us older folks who used to use paper and books and stuff like that, it's kind of like, you know, this is a page that you can scribble on and you can say, hey, this thing is related to that thing. And so I stuck that in there while we were talking, right? As, so it's not something that you read, it's something that you interact with. You view it, you navigate it, you play with it, you make it your own. So one of the things I like about, this is, the technology I'm using is Obsidian and Massive Wiki. It's not a particularly great Wiki, but it has the capabilities of Wiki that it's interactive and the capabilities of Massive Wiki that you get your own copy of the Wiki on your own computer and then you can do whatever you want with it. You can make it your own. And if you want, you can kind of give that version back to the comments. One last thing, Obsidian has a pretty decent graph visualizer and I've only started play with this, but you can see that Leif is connected to the new club of, actually, let me just highlight this. He's connected to the new club of Paris over on the left there, up on the top. He talked about Tony Buzan. He's friends with Hank Kuhn and he wrote a book called Corporate Lungitude and he's friends with Jerry Mikulski and he talked also about positive cartography. In this map, you can click any of these and get to it. This, I've been careful to stay in the interesting parts of this workbook. A bunch of this workbook, these pages are blank like this. This page needs more text. So I will fill in some of this semi-automatically and then there's a bunch of the call that I'm just not gonna do it because this was an experiment to learn how to do this more than it was. Even though I would love to finish this, it's not quite the thing. Here's another good one. Primacy of Money is related to the motion of things towards vitality. It's part of the stories and the new story we were talking about. Upward Spiral, Grace said an amazing thing about it. Paul Carfell was mentioned and Primacy of Money is now related. This line here is something that I added just today in connecting those things. And we noticed yesterday that I can do a cool thing here and color just the books and color just the people and color the topics. Can you store those filters? Well, there's one good answer and one frustrating answer. They are stored. So every time I load Obsidian, they will come back to like that, but I can't store separate ones. So if I wanted to separate, this one up here is kind of even more important. This little expression up here tells it to ignore the table of contents pages. Otherwise the table of contents pages would make these big stars that you can see the more interesting stars from. This one I should probably drop out actually because everything's connected to the rough transcript. This is a good star because it's all about the content of it. But now you can see also that there's the red is books and yellow is people and green is topics. So it's coming along pretty well. Thanks, Pete. Are questions, comments, anyone? Pete, this is brilliant. Thank you for doing that. Interesting experiments. I was struck by the path people slash entity and is that a sort of physical path where there would be a page under the people folder in Obsidian or is that simply a naming? It's because Obsidian works with files. It's a literal path. And I have a strong hunch that the namespace thing is important. It's a little clumsy. You'll see places where it says and person Ted Nelson was the one who blah, blah, blah. It's like, why did you put that person there? But interestingly, I think that it's dropped out I think that it's dropped out accidentally but wonderfully. This is, you know, this is one of those pages. Oh, interesting. So there's no person flashed out of the topic here dropped out, even though it's still, I don't know if you can see the bar there down at the bottom, it links properly. That's interesting. Yeah, it is interesting. I don't know why that happened. I don't know. Anyway, so another thing about the namespaces is you don't want very many of them. So I have topics, a big thing. I don't want like 10 or 20 or 50 subtopics. Another thing is I played a little bit with the scope of Lincoln context. With the workbook idea, I want it to be the contents of that call. And it turns out I start filling in a little bit of context. You know, one of the books has a co-author that wasn't mentioned in the call. I still put them in as a person. So there's a little bit of context around it that I want. And then each of these workbooks, you can imagine, I imagine anyway. I don't know if you can imagine, but I can imagine, calls like treated like this as bookshelves or books on a bookshelf. And then each of the workbooks starts talking to each other with obsidian. It's easy to grab the topic Glass Bead Game or book Glass Bead Game, copy that file and drop it into the next workbook that talks about that thing. In the future, we'll have fancier stuff with Massive Wiki, whereas they will automatically do that. They'll be able to pull content across from one place to another. So this, Stacey, I'll pass it to you in just a sec. So the structure that Pete just described is a design decision Pete just made, but brings me back to something that I was heading toward immediately, which is for me, when I'm taking notes and in a conversation like this one, when I connected to the Glass Bead Game, I already have the Glass Bead Game in my context. So richly linked with a whole bunch of stuff. So the idea that it would live in a different notebook or that whatever is weird to me. And I'm trying to figure out what does the distributed set of tuples look like where this information gets gathered up dynamically from whatever workbooks or databases you have access to in some sense. I don't know. But if a workbook is going to have a fresh new link for Paul Profell and for Pete Kaminski and for all those, we're gonna just have endless, endless- Yeah, they'll start to grow together. So you'll have a super workbook that is the connection of more things. Probably you'll also be able to turn on and off. I just wanna see the Paul Profell links in Jerry's workbooks. I just wanna see the Paul Profell links in Grace's workbooks. Yeah, okay. And we'll pick this up again. And then the whole thing is a super workbook, right? Where you can toggle on and off the different workbooks. And workbooks are kind of like namespaces then. Kind of, yeah. Okay, which is interesting. Stacy then, Mark on top. Yeah, that was fabulous. I think what I was talking about is probably more relevant to the workbook thing because I'm talking, like you're talking about wanting human creation. And I'm thinking that could be a way to get people to do that and want to do it. Like an intern would want to do it. So that's really more relevant to what I've been trying to say. The other thing I wanna say that the speaker part for somebody like me is really important. And I think for a lot of people behind the curtain, when Jerry put up that map of late for me, that was so useful. That's something that I would look at, a speaker says something, and then I go further and I look at them and I say, oh, and they're interested in that. To me, that's a really human centered way. That's how I found my way here. Agreed. Thanks, Stacy. That's great. Mark on top. This is really showing curation done well on the individual level. Of course, I'm always worrying about the collective level as usual. But this is really nice. But few things I observed is that the namespacing, we speak about namespacing notebooks, but you also did namespacing entity types. And for many entity types, it makes perfect sense to do that because they are discrete, like people and events and this and that, they're very well-defined. And then you've got the weird entity type that I spend way too much time worrying about, which have many types and many points of view and many filters on one entity. And so every, a few entities need that multiplicity and every entity needs multiplicity of curation, right? This is how this person explains this, this is how this person explains this. And this is really the, what I think is the really interesting point is, what, how can we combine? As you say, okay, now we have 50 people doing workbooks. How much do I have to read? And that way the connections are important because when the connections are explicit, you can say, okay, I've read this one and I've got 80% of the connected entities. Now, which is the next one that has the most new entities I haven't read about that connect to this one. And then this, and then you kind of do an ordering so that you cover the most links with the least pages, the least versions. Or you can- And that's a place where AI helps a lot or something like K-Trank. When you've done a bunch of human curation and then you can have the machine tell you, okay, it clustered together, how does that help inform me? Exactly. And that's not even AI, that's just computation. Like you've read this one. So you've read about that link. And so what part of the picture are you missing? But one thing I was noticing is the entities you're doing in bold, they look like claims to me. And I know you were trying to capture some of them at past topics, but some of them have more structure than that as such. And this is where I think we need to go beyond the classic markdown paradigm and we have to be able to stand alone, stand off annotation to get deeper into the structure. But still, I mean, this is really- I agree. This is a very well done markdown. Like if you're going to do markdown, this is how to do it. Thank you. And I agree that markdown is fairly limited. You're hitting the limits. Yeah. Yeah. But that's still, yeah. Pete, thank you. I think the perfect timing to show what you did. We made you a piece of this demo on Thursday as part of the check-ins because the community should know that this exists. But also this takes us back into the conversation about tiles and the mosaic. Also, I'll just reflect a couple of things. One is that I created Project CROV in my brain and I called this Pete CROVs. I'm using it as a verb now, Pete. I thought you'd be amused. Amused, yes. So you basically crabbed last Thursday's OGM call, which I'm connecting to today. And then I looked at what I had woven for the OGM call and I remembered that your efforts so far don't go that deep into the call. You were only like 15 minutes into the call. And I'm like, oh, right, right, right. The Secchi model that Leif brought up, VentureLab, Thor, I think you do have, right? You got it, Thor was early in the call. But there's a whole- It's got the whole call, but I've done it kind of opportunistically. Right, so the transcript is of the entire call, but you were weaving your contextual add-in all that. The topics are chosen from, and this was an interesting observation when I was doing stuff. I went through the chat and the transcript fast, grabbed everything. So I've got most of the things that you have here. I am missing the Secchi model, but things like scan motor, most of these actually I've got. So going through the call, I did kind of a sparse thing. And then different parts, it feels like playing with, and Stacey, this is where, this whole thing felt like play to me. Serious, very serious play. And it took hours. This was four or five hours of work, or play. But it started to get, once you've got, like Jerry does, once you have enough kind of stuff in the map, then making new connections and adding one thing in the map that connects with a bunch of other stuff is richly rewarding. So I did start with a detailed run-through of the first five minutes of the call and got nowhere. But then when I got a skeleton of the whole thing and a bunch of blank pages, then it was easy to start filling in those pages. And I did it kind of like jumping, oh wow, this is an interesting part of the call. Let me, and then let me make some links. And then, so I do have, I'm missing a bunch of the call, Jerry, or you're totally right. Or I've just got a link and nothing filled in yet. And that said, I love what you've done. So two questions, I guess. One question is, this feels like you just, it feels like you saw something that was exciting and you followed it. And it feels like you went way beyond what I thought the scope of CROV was originally going to be as a fundable tile as a number of hours that you were going to devote to something we could sort of like put into the public sphere. It feels like you've gone well beyond sort of the scope of that. So I don't know how you feel about the scope where you want to divide it. Is this two tiles, is this multi-tile? I have no idea, I'm just asking because you've done a lot more than we started talking about. For me, CROV is a really kind of a very simple automation thing that just moves some of the assets around and gets them in the right place. Saving time and energy, your time. What I was doing here, if I were to build this, or if I were able to build this to somebody, some of it would get built to Massive Wiki. There's, I pushed the edges of Massive Wiki builder and now I've got a bunch of to-do items that would be lovely like backlinks is something that Massive Wiki builders should do. A big chunk of the time would actually be build to Knowledge Weaving or something like that. That's what this really was. Yeah, but also like in terms of CROV Automation from the basic start, like sending something through the script to get a full transcript is part of CROV Automation. And then you have a transcript, cleaning up the transcript, I think is part of CROV Automation, not the manual editorial part at all, but whatever can be automated, which might include running chainsaw against it to pull the book links out into a separate file and make that available, which might include a couple of other things, which might include tagging speakers. If that were easily automated, that might include tagging speakers so that they're actually properly in the transcript. And there's a little bit of scope creep along each way when you decide, oh, this is doable with a tiny bit of effort. And so we need to kind of both worry about that and be excited about that because everything I just described adds a lot of value to the transcripts. Right? Totally agreed, yeah. And thank you for kind of stretching CROV out into more of an activity. A couple of other things. Once you have that list of books, actually especially the books, each of those pages I'm assembling by hand, but that's something that you could just automate, right? So there should be a book chainsaw or something like that. Same thing with the topics. Each of those topics, almost all of those topics is a pretty good Wikipedia search. I guess the boring ones, not boring, but the rote ones. The primacy of money is a phrase that I came up with. I don't think anybody said it, but it was a concept of the whole call. So that's not a good one for Wikipedia, but things like ComputerLip or the Glass Bead game or, that's something that there should be a kind of a Wikipedia chainsaw for that just, you give it a set of topics, tons of code to do that to take text and insert Wikipedia links. And book chainsaw sounds like Fahrenheit 451 saying, Mark chainsaw is the name of some code Pete wrote to strip the URLs out of Zoom chats. And Bentley has a similar project, which he calls, Zoom chat, easy reader. They're actually, they're complementary. Bentley's thing makes it nice to read. And that's actually, I'm using, I use Bentley's code to make the Zoom chat nice to read in Markdown. Link chainsaw is what Vincent is using. He throws Zoom chats into it via API and gets a bunch of links back. And then that's what he's using to populate the links intro. Awesome. So each of these, so the analogy I'm using here is that Unix is actually a large bag of utilities that happen to be shipped around together that everybody knows how to use together that call each other all the time, right? And so I think what we're building here is a new set of utilities for managing media objects, improving them, enhancing them, making them available. And part of improving or enhancing them is meta tagging and linking them up in different ways. So, yeah, extractors, as long as it's not value extraction then we're good. One of the things I used it for a bit actually was something called TechSoup on the map, which is, I've got a bunch of stuff in lowercase and I want it to be title case. So I was copying back and forth between TechSoup. And so we're almost up on our hour and I want to go to my second question, which is what does this mean for other tiles in OGM's Mosaic? And can we frame one up to sort of fun at the same way we framed up crowd? Can we frame it for second one? And have you already done a second one here or do we pick some other corner of the universe of things that we'd like to do? I think that makes a lot of sense and just take a bite out of that and involve other people. Do you want to go back to your tiles? You bet. Oh, that's right. I never finished explaining the diagram. That's hilarious. Okay, let me quickly explain the rest of this diagram because it's pretty central to that. If I may real quick. So the top left there where it says video transcript clean links and then you've got arrows into narrative and maps. The thing that I did, the crabbing is maybe kind of starting to be like kind of like that. Yep, this whole zone here. This is what we just saw done right here, exactly. And then for the new people to the call, I think some of you have seen this multi-layer, multi-plane camera analogy, sort of mosaic of what OGM sees as the entities and people in its environment and as the projects that is interested in fostering toward creating open global mind like new environment, which would include, which includes, by the way, freeing Jerry's brain into this environment, into some new platform. So these tools that we're talking about here involve those kinds of things. So this diagram, the split here at the top of the screen is important because it separates the left side, which is logical argumentation, mind mapping, braining, whatever, whatever from squishy, soft, rebuilding trust and creating safe spaces things. And those are equally important in OGM, even if we, being mostly geeks who've stayed in the conversation, are totally like obsessed with the left side of the diagram. Hugely important is who cares if you've drawn a beautiful argument for an irrefutable claim, if nobody's actually gonna sit and talk with you or improve the claim with you or give you their own claim or assemble a claim based on their logics and their evidence. So then the videos and transcripts get turned in and then sort of magic happens here on the left. All of these now enhance raw materials, get turned into narratives, maps and other sorts of things. Topic maps, argumentation diagrams, debate logics, animations, who knows what and they get poured into some arena, some public space that is the generative commons and some shared memory. And then those squiggly line up but down here is what I call the fungus space because the job of masticating, the digesting, metabolizing and putting these into the commons is that job of feeding the fungus. And this fungus should be feeding the rest of us. The idea of doing this is not just because it's kind of fun and boy, we're filling some databases. The idea of doing this is a sense-making exercise so that these shared memories and shared opinions and different ways of seeing things actually help us make sense of the world. So then this little arena here becomes a space for comparing narratives and maps, having interesting discussions, coming into it are many individual points of view which are manifest with different tools and different ways. And we need to nurture individuals and small groups that carry those points of view and manifest them well and can explain them well and can enter the arena and talk well with them. Whether it's a set of Rome databases or Kumu diagrams or whatever, doesn't that the tools matter less than somebody who's cared to articulate their arguments, their beliefs. And then out of this, God willing, come better questions, experiments to set up and then over time sort of the crystallization of more integral points of view. And here I mean integral, not in the Ken Wilber sense or the spiral dynamic sense but more in the, hey, this space merely gets messy if every individual on earth decides to have a lot, all their opinions manifest separately in the space. It gets really interesting if we start to say, oh, what Mark Antoine says about the logic of planes and how you weave all that, it totally speaks for me. And I will add a couple of things to it, but really you should go over and look at the space that he curates on that topic as far as I'm concerned. Someone else might agree and 50 million people might agree. And then 50 million people might say, actually no, Mark Antoine is all wet on this. You should go talk to this other person, Jane, who's got a different concept of how to do that. And that we start to crystallize and then we can compare experiments and all of that. So this is kind of the view of what happens. And then there's another layer here, which is that's infrastructure, project entities. I guess I thought I had another layer, which was more and then I showed it a little earlier. These are kind of super tiles. These are larger than the project tiles that I'm trying to figure out how to fund because some of these things are large. Multi-mapper user experience experiments around this arena. How do we take pattern languages and make them more accessible? That's a really big idea. So it needs to be broken down into some smaller tiles. Arthur Brock's game-shifting idea as a frame for an iPad or a web browser app. That's a piece of code that would shift how we think about all the software playing together. That's a bigger than a tile. Graphic recording app that knows how to do deep linking so that when people use procreate to draw and annotate a session, they're actually linking into the big fungus somehow. That might be a small manageable thing, but I don't know exactly how to do that. Probably we start with open source code like Inkscape or some other graphics program that is modifiable and add a couple of things to it if we went that direction. Hyper knowledge claims, Mark Antoine, that's sort of your territory and I don't know what the tiles look like beyond my pay grade, but I would love to know what the tiles look like because Mark Antoine, the moment we have a description of six different tiles that are fundable where you know how long it'll take you to create this piece of code or whatever, I can go out and say, hey, look, here's the whole directory of things that we know work. And then the more each of your tiles is socialized so that we know that this tile will serve 15 different projects or three different audiences or whatever, that's fabulous information like that enriches our whole process. So let me stop and see what everybody thinks. And Michael, you missed, let me just go back to your screen again for a sec. I think you've seen these diagrams before but for example, factor is over here under entities which is a layer of this multi-plane camera and then participants, you and Phil are above factor but you're also participating in other projects here. So this would be sort of a multi-connected layer down to entities and projects and all that. So these would be ways of seeing that the reason I use the multi-plane camera metaphors that you could imagine just like in a good graphics program turning on and off different layers to see different kinds of relationships and mess with them. Okay, I only wanna see the abstract layer of what is this project doing? Great, that's done. Now let's see that plus the projects overlaid on that but not all the people because that's too messy and then you add things in and subtract things. And in so doing, you can explore the whole territory and this is all the view from OGM's mast. So, and I don't know if this appeals to a soul in the world besides me but if it did, it would be lovely if there was a stack of drawings like this some of which might be the same drawing like, hey, Jerry's diagram of how to make sense of the world works for me too except I would modify this corner over here but then I see a whole different set of entities and et cetera, et cetera, that would be really cool but then as you socialize this and extend it and network it, it becomes a series of linked mosaic layers, makes sense? Well, I see nodding which is like phenomenal and I see jazz hands which is like phenomenal. So critiques, questions, thoughts for next steps because I'm trying to figure out how do we together now turn this into some marching orders and tile descriptions and project plans and guilds that they're happily like, you know, chipping away at pieces of this because this feels to me like the building of a cathedral and we've got like the stone mason's guild that's starting to form up and a few people who know how to make mortar and a few people who know how to carve gargoyles and if we do this right we could actually have a nice artifact, Pete and Mark. I think a good next step these are beautiful diagrams by the way, Jerry thank you for making them and they are perfect the way they are. I would add to those a probably a diagrams.net version of the tiles in the mosaics. I'm trying to redraw them I'm trying to redraw them all in diagrams that just haven't gotten back to finish them. Yeah, I don't know if that should be you I think having one or several people redraw them and to do that together and actually that would be a great thing to do on a call like this. And if diagrams.net were an open source graphics tool that might be the platform through which to start extending the linkability and a couple of other feature requests or something like that. That would be awesome. Like if they were open to it that would be great to actually extend that tool. That would be awesome. I think so the process I have in my head and I, you know it would be fun to do it on a call like this or maybe we would schedule a different call but getting a few people to go okay here's the capture part here's the sense making part here's the fungus face here's the knowledge commons and starting to cluster those into boxes and lines and start to have names is probably kind of the next thing that I would do so that then you can and I guess probably taking chunks of those taking one box in a larger map and blowing that up into a whole diagram and then naming parts of that diagram. You know, here's the here's craft here's chains on this. Yeah. So the projects layered clearly needs to have crab added to it like sitting over that logical part of the infrastructure diagram, right? That makes total sense. And then as we get more we pepper them and then that view of projects is a conceptual view which should skinny down to a dashboard or a, you know when you, when I was young we went through Frankfurt airport and they had the flights coming in with all the little flop, flop, flop, flop, flop, flop you know where all the flights would show up that kind of display of what's on offer like what do we have on deck? What if we got some more money what would we pour it into that winds up being our dashboard, right? But our dashboard has a conceptual view with that contains exactly the same data. That's one of the goals here is that there's a different way of seeing and a directory is a directory of participants that you can walk over to Trove and see except when it's mapped into the projects and the entities it looks like that other diagram that I was showing and Trove has a couple of different ways of seeing views. So one of which is a network diagram but which is pretty rudimentary it's more rudimentary than what Pete was showing a little earlier with Obsidian but there isn't that much of a gap between seeing the raw data in Trove and maybe seeing it over in the multi-plane mosaic. That would be really interesting as then each entity in Trove which is an entity has an opportunity if it wants to to curate its participants or to let its participants find their way into where do they fit into the projects which actually brings me back to Ben Roberts who is using SUMAP which is a survey tool plus Kumu to do some of that mapping. I'm just realizing I should bring Ben Roberts into these conversations because he is on fire about making SUMAP do more things. To put a fine point on it I think a really good very next step is just to start drawing in diagrams right now and start to name and cluster. So I think we should do that soon. Cool, okay. That sounds great. Mark, Ben Stacey. Yeah, very quick. I was trying to connect with Idealum and I couldn't figure it out so I started expanding my searches of what it's connected to and basically came across this edge sense which is what seemed to be kind of an open source mapping of a conversation space. And there is a very interesting timeline view where you can basically scroll through the timeline and see the nodes and edges change. Interesting little video. It is a cute video. It's sense was a small, probably the most well-defined part of the catalyst project. And all it does is if you have a history of interactions you draw an edge between the people who have made that interaction. The edges don't fade or thicken so there's definitely ways to improve it but it has huge value because it is possible to see clusters in big groups who replies to whom. It is a bit harder in a conversation because like a lot of people will be responding to a lot of people at the same time. So it's really for forums and email and web forums is what it was made for originally but it does work well. They had made, we had adapted it to the catalyst interchange format for conversation which was made on RDF shock but it also, they got it to work on Drupal instances also. It's fairly adaptable to tell it, okay, here's the data. Let me feed you the data in a way that makes sense to you. Awesome. Stacy? So this may not resonate with anybody else here, probably won't but I'll say it anyway. In my imagination, you have weaving the world, now you have craved over it. To me, that third piece is that whole right side of the graph, building trust, safe spaces, all of that. For me, that fits over with the human piece. So I see people working on the workbook using the transcript of the call and I see that as even being filmed, watching to see what happens because if everybody is making the same sense and it's all working together, that's great but it will also allow for somebody that says, no, that's not the way to do it. Instead of fighting over it, they just move over and start curating their own thing and it offers different tracks but you can't just create trust and safe spaces and all these things somewhere else. That has to be woven in from the beginning. So I see a weaving of those two projects as the third project. Crab is a tile in the larger thing. So I'm not sure about crab on top of weaving the web. I think crab enables a chunk of weaving the web and a bunch of other projects because of what it does. What's the name of the workbook? Maybe I should, I'm talking about the workbook. The workbook was one example of how you might play out one call episode as a memorialized enhanced artifact. So that's like taking one episode up on the upper left of the diagram when there were lines with thoughts. What Pete did was he took one of our calls and then really enriched it and kind of woven into the fungus except his piece of the fungus is its own little workbook and needs to be crafted into the larger fungus. It's in the fungus in the sense that all of these are marked on files on a GitHub repo but it's not woven into the fungus in the sense of there's a version of Pete that lives in that workbook that's not the same version of Pete that lives in other places, for example. So we have to resolve that and figure out how to do it. Does that make sense? Yeah, I don't know that I've been clear. I guess the question I have is... I wanted to go back to what you said though because this idea of people actually doing what Pete just did on episodes and all that from their own point of view and all that is kind of the conceit of the shadow calls in weaving the world. So weaving the world would have episodes and then we do a bunch of stuff to episodes including everything Pete just showed us. That's like fabulous. And then we sit down and go, oh, somebody else has a completely different opinion about this, this is what that opinion is and they're for a favorite tool or in the same tool and watching that and comparing that is like what I think you just said which is where we're heading. So for me, that's a project on its own. That's part of the reason I'm excited about and having trouble naming the shadow episodes of the podcast. Like are they behind the curtain episodes? Are they post-production episodes? Are they feeding the fungus? Which is a separate podcast that happens to be remorally connected to weaving the world. I'm not sure yet. And we're gonna stand up some really quick short calls to go through the process and figure out what language works and what we need to learn to do and all that kind of stuff. You like remorally connected? Thanks, me too. It just came out. The notion of shadowing is slightly new to me. Could you expand on that a tiny bit? The notion of which one? Shadowing, the actual term shadowing is understood. It could be, you know. It's more behind the scenes we're making of or extra content for. I have a bad joke. They should be called the meta episode. Oh, God. Actually, they should be. They should totally be. Except that somebody stole a meta from us. No, they didn't. I don't accept that at all. I think we have an insurrection and take the damn word back. Exactly. So shadow is probably the worst of the alternate terms that I've come up with because shadow has a whole bunch of shadow meanings that are not good. And what I mean is there's an event that happened, it's a conversation. And instead of just saying, thanks so much, here it goes into the archive. Next, we're gonna go, that was a really interesting conversation. Let's deepen it. Let's weave it into the big fungus. Let's connect it to other thoughts. Let's try to understand the places where we misunderstood each other. Let's spend some time on it. And the fear I have actually is that like Pete spending five hours on the first 15 minutes of last Thursday's OGM call that this thing could expand fractally and infinitely and recursively. And we go back to how do you eat an elephant, right? One bite at a time. We're just gonna take a whack at this. And if we can encourage lots of people to join us in the endeavor, then the work starts to dissolve because many hands doing consistent, similar work can actually start to make this. The reason Wikipedia is cool is that everybody knows that it's an encyclopedia. They have a bunch of standards that say this goes here, this goes there. If it weren't that and if everybody were just showing up going, oh, I think an encyclopedia should be like upside down, it would be a shit show. But it's not. It's an extremely useful and usable thing because it's got some consistency. We've got to figure some of those things out. Mr. Caronza, you may have the last word on this call unless there's more interest. Just one last thing. I mean, what I am trying to figure out is how to talk about the interest that I have, which is actually the smallest amount of knowledge, the smallest unit of knowledge would be linking Jerry Mikowski to Jerry. It would be linking Shadow to the Shadow knows, or these many different things. And so certainly the area that I'm playing in is basically you have a sense. You have another sense and then you have a link from that sense to the other sense. What sense A to sense B, they're different senses. There's a link between them and that link is unqualified. It's simply that the link exists. Core, core, core, core hyper knowledge concern, of course. Yeah, basically we have many to many links between names and meanings, between symbols and well, we had that conversation before. And moreover, those links are scoped, right? We have a conversation scope or a book scope or a community scope. And it's in that scope that these naming links, these semiotic links exist. And of course the scopes reverberate with one another, right? I'm using a word in a certain sense because there's a community interpretation, but we're also, we have different communities with different valuation of the different semiotic links. So it's about expressing that is absolutely fundamental if you're going to start weaving the, okay, this is your sense making, this is my sense making, how do we make it ours sense making? I look at scope, rather than scope, I look at context and basically it goes both ways. If you have a link of Jerry to Mark and Twan, there's many different concepts that can come out of that but it happens in a particular context at one point in time, but the contexts are many too many to both the sign vehicles and the links between them. So to for a further, yeah, yeah, thank you. So Mark, and you will either like or hate this characterization. I kind of see you as the Jimi Hendrix or John Coltrane of phrases. I see you as discovering and riffing. So what Pete did bold facing and calling out interesting texts, interesting snippets of text in the call, you're doing on steroids in a tool that's worked beautifully for you that doesn't generate outputs that I know how to connect in yet. And I'd love to figure out how to connect those outputs in because in one sense you're doing the high fade, you're like the high fade meta super duper generator and high fade are basically the leading edges of mycelium, like the little tips that grow fast toward other stuff where the exchange of nutrients happens and all that. So you're busy building high fade at note taking speed, right and that's a large piece of what you're doing. And I'm trying to figure out, okay, where does it fit? Where does it fit? Where does it fit? And I don't know yet. Well, we're working towards it. I have a part-time job, which is basically access to all human knowledge. So outside of that part-time job, age has slowed me down. I am no longer the 25-year-old coder who stays up all night. Damn age, but we have wisdom. Damn age. Yes, we do, which is interesting. And the topic for another call. Wisdom would be a great call-to-call conversation. Yeah, totally. Yes. I actually would make a fantastic call topic. Anybody who hasn't had a chance to jump in, would you like to add anything to this conversation? I really appreciate this conversation. It's been really generative. And Pete, your demo was awesome again. Yeah, I'd like to just second that. I really enjoyed Pete's demo. I liked the way the links are made. I liked the way the sources can be accessed. And I'd like to see more of it and learn how to use it. Great, great stuff. So there's a path. So there's a path visible toward a more usable mass of Wiki that lets people do this. And I think I'm starting to see better what the pieces are and how they fit. Sorry, Michael. Go ahead. So I was just going to say and wrap up that I'm really sorry. I missed Pete's demo, but very much looking forward to going back and looking at the recording of this call so I can see it. Because I could tell it was rich. Cool. The afterglow. After burgers, after, yeah. Afterglow works. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Anybody else, Mr. Park? Well, I'm here just the comment that I made about the exchange between Mark and Tuan and Jack. It's a thorny subject, but it seems so key and might want to be a subject for a call on office. It gets back to all our ways of working together, our informal ways of working together and how to bring them to formality so we don't have so many people reinventing the same wheel or... The flotilla conversations, and I haven't been in on those, I think are a forum where these things could be sorted, right? We get a bit deeper on that sometimes on flotilla not as regularly as I would want, but sometimes definitely we get deeper on the how do we actually unify our data structures because yeah, that's part of the conversation we're trying to have. And if we can scope a tile that lets factor be used symbiotically with the markdown repos that Pete just demoed that are connected back to the original media artifacts, that this, that, that, it gets really interesting, really fast. And my goal is to speck out those tile pieces and get them funded and get somebody to pour some money into this community so that those things exist. But I mean, I feel like the superstructure of you needing to get those funded as opposed to a template that says, hey, internet archive or, you know, or Rome or, you know, any kind of entity, for-profit or nonprofit, you know, this is what we're doing and this is the template for how you can plug into it. And these are, you know, I just, I just feel like we don't even know, you know, every day I discover somebody new who's further along on one little piece and, you know, further along on another little piece, but, you know, doing so many of the same things that so many of us are doing. And, and, you know, we obviously say things like, oh, let's all get together. But I think the biggest thing that we could come up with is here's how it works. We don't have anything, but here is the co-op of co-ops that allows for this piece and that piece. You know, we have the same problem in the collaborative technology alliance. It's just, you know, just, it's, I don't know. You know, it involves, involves lawyering, it involves, you know, philosophy, it involves all kinds of things. But to me, it feels like the thing that holds us back, that keeps us talking, you know, conceptually and not able to do things is how does this work? Agreed. Big question. No, this is extremely important. And that, I mean, that's the point, that's why I keep saying, I keep thinking of hyper knowledge so much as a tool but as a protocol, we need ways to, for our tools to speak together so that we can each work on what we're good at and put them together in a unified ecosystem. That's again the entire point. And, but that means, yeah, very complicated things about having universal names when URLs are not quite it, then this is the concern. And that's my disagreement. I don't think we need universal names. And I don't think we need formalized language. I do not support creating a type of language that is universal or that has, you know, these over specifications. I want to work with poetry rather than code. When I see universal names, by the way, I don't mean like one ontology to roll them all. That is also an anti-goal for me. Mark, I think you got triggered by an inferred meaning from the word. But I do think we need to be able to say, here's how I'm naming this, this is how I, you're naming this and how do we... It's the problem of translation. It's a translation problem. It's a translation. But being able to do the translation means that I'm able to expose my personal name and for it to be used universally. And that's what I meant by universal name. Could we continue? Yeah, and we exist in a world with, you know, with borders and different laws and different languages and, you know, just, I mean, in the physical world. And we figure out ruling concepts or common concepts to allow us to travel from one environment to another and know that this word translates as that word. And, you know, in some places it's easier in some places it's not. And, but if we're all, you know, putting up, you know, you know, Berlin walls around what we're doing and not figuring out how we can interact with each other because, you know, we don't have the understanding. It's just smart. Agreed. Agreed. Excellent. Is this a good pause point? Thank you for a really fruitful, juicy call and playful call. Really, like, we haven't seen, we don't seem to have managed to have built that many things during, you know, almost two years of OGM, but we've built the community and we're having fun learning together. And I've had more than my share as a human of conversations that started with like drifting into some space and ended with, oh my God, really? And modifying my picture of what needs to happen and where it goes. And it's because of our, because of these conversations exactly. So thank you all for that. Until then, let's build the galactic encyclopedia. Yes.