 Greetings. There I am. This takes me back to sort of like waking up on a camping trip, you know. It's kind of like who's getting up? Yeah, yeah. Who's showered in the river? Right. Man, that was cold. Yeah, it was. Pick up some cowboy coffee. Actually, I'm trying something called mud water. What's mud water? Mud water is a new coffee substitute. The base is chai tea, but then they add three kinds of mushrooms and more cinnamon and a bunch of things. So it tastes more full body than decaf. It has one-seventh the caffeine. And the chai tea is with black tea, so it's decaffeinated black tea? No, it has some caffeine in it, but they calculate it's about one-seventh of a cup of real coffee. So if you had two cups of this, you'd still be in pretty good shape, you know, as far as sleeping. I was doing regular. First I stopped at three and then I stopped at noon. And then I said, you know, I tried going cold turkey and I said, wow, it really does make a big difference. Yeah. So now I'm on mud water. Excellent. And I'm, I'm opening up our matter most chat so I can chat in the place we're preserving it. Right. Yeah. I need to get that link. Get that. Yeah, I was going to type in mud water. And we can figure out the link. You put the link for the matter most in chat again, please. You bet. Thank you. Copy link. Here. And. Oh, I was about to put the link to the matter most chat in. The matter most chat, which would be absolutely not useful. High trade. Highly recursive. Totally way too recursive. There we go. And a couple of people had lots of trouble getting into the matter most chat. So don't worry about it. We will report back, but, but we like to keep the chat going between calls. So that's why we're trying to use the matter most. Thank you. Mike, congratulations. Thank you. Mike is now. Mike is now he's made an honest woman out of his lady friend. He is a married man. He had a beautiful virtual wedding. And went on flowers. Went on a micro moon. Jerry and April, I'm so glad you could join us. Thank you. I'm going to be back in a minute. 8 30 in the morning or eight o'clock Pacific time. And Michael's incredibly smart daughter, Lizzie gave the most beautiful toast with like three bullet points. It was really good. I was really pleased. She didn't use PowerPoint, but. But it was, but it was beautiful. I will post that in the chat to share. I'm very proud father, of course. Yeah. I'm very proud of that. I'm very proud of that. Two years ago, when was that? It was so. Well, let's see. You guys swung by on your trip. We were, Lizzie and I were there for the eclipse. Yes, that's right. And we were all just back from the eclipse. That's right. And I had gone camping with Charles overnight to go see the eclipse on a farm down. Near Bend or wherever, wherever the good viewing was here. And the company we used is called wed fully. WED FUL Y. And they just did an incredible job of. Choreographing the whole thing and managing our invitations. It was. It was clearly something they've done a few times about 500 weddings online. And I'm trying to figure out how to invest. And I think one, I think one of your invited couples was one of their early weddings. And it was. I think they were like, they were like, I've been a couple of years ago. I've been doing. I've been doing. I've been doing. They were like, things seem smoother now. Which I thought was a really nice comment. I think they need to have a spin off called dead fully. Yeah. Fenerals. Even larger demand for that. It could be actually great fully. Have you suggested that to them? That would really work. Well, with one L, right? The words probably available. That would totally work. I'd write them back, write them back, because really I had a Zoom Memorial for my mom who passed in December, and it was just Zoom. It was, you know, it was lovely, but it was just Zoom. And so I think there's lots of space for celebrating and doing things in different ways. Yeah, well, setting up several cameras and having the ability to move back and forth and then have music coming in and virtual participants. It was, everything just works so well. And also choreographing people into tables to talk during reception later and so forth. And then having the wedding, the bridal couple move from table to table during the reception period. Yeah. All works. And dancing. With dancing, with socially distanced dancing, socially extremely distanced dancing. Yeah. Yeah. So, thank you and congratulations. That was lovely. Thank you. These are OGM-y times. I don't know about you all, but I'm seeing just like, and I'm having conversations with people who are building stuff like what we're looking at and who are great, who are groups we should sort of make contact with and cooperate with, et cetera. So I'm excited to see where we are and what's up. So why don't we, and there's not too many of us on this call yet so far. So I think we'll make it through everybody. I was otherwise going to give a little bit of a warning that we may not make it through and so forth because we're contemplating our protocols and all of that. So why don't we go Ken, Julian. Well, Julian's muted and no video, so I'm gonna wait a little bit before going to you. Oh, he's there. Okay, so let's go Ken, Julian and Judy. Hello everybody, good morning, afternoon, evening, night, whatever, wherever you may be. Big news for me today is I get my second shot. I'll be fully modernized by the end of today. Pretty jazzed about that. I see the CDC has just released some new guidelines that say once you're fully vaccinated, you can actually be with people who are not vaccinated indoors without masks. So a bunch of my friends and I are planning a big outdoor party on April 18th. We will all be fully vaccinated by then and first time in over a year that we're all getting together. So just very, very excited, looking forward to being able to hug my friends and laugh and play bocce and drink wine together and just have a blast. So that's kind of top of mind today for me. Let's see, last week I wasn't here because I had a paid gig, yay, very nice. We'll see if that turns into more. It was a subcontracted thing. But I think the folks who hired me were pleased with what I did. Right now I'm involved, the KikoLab folks are having a very interesting conversation about how to measure collective intelligence, which proves to be very difficult. We can describe what collective intelligence is and it's kind of an emergent phenomena so it's really hard to predict. You have to look at it afterwards rather than before and we're trying to get into this, what are some ways we could actually measure? How does it show up? When does it show up? And so I've been doing some mapping this week about what do individuals bring or need to bring for collective intelligence to possibly show up? What do we need to do interpersonally to evoke it? And then what's the context in which that can also be supported from three different perspectives? And I'll be happy to share that map. Once it's a little more complete, it's still pretty much in its raw state right now. So that's my OGME check-in. Thanks Ken. That's super interesting. And I think the piece of that that I'm most interested in is establishing the initial conditions for collective intelligence. Meaning, and I think there's much more we can do about that. And then I'm afraid, I'm actually afraid that measuring collective intelligence is actually correlates negatively or is a negative feedback loop with continuing collective intelligence. Because for example, if we had 50 communities out in the world and we said these three are the most collectively intelligent and broadcast that information, then they would kind of attract weird dynamics and their own chemistry and dynamics might be set off wrong. I don't know. I mean, it doesn't seem to me like a formula for goodness. But I can understand that wanting to, if we're all seeking collective intelligence, it makes sense to try to figure out how to measure this thing like, you know. Why? And I sort of do doubt that. So Gil, you don't want to measure it at all for any reason. Well, I want to question why the assumption that measuring collective intelligence will help improve or increase collective intelligence. You know, there's a scientific mental model there. I think the assumption is that measuring it will prove to funders of efforts to build it that it's working. I'm not sure that there's a working assumption that measuring it will improve it. Yeah. Measurement in funders is a whole big rat hole that we can talk about. Ain't it? How funders deal with measurement. But another story for another time. Sorry, Judith. That's okay. We have a couple of people jumping in. Judy, Doug, John. Checking wise, I'm just doing dendritic collective stuff everywhere and I don't need to enumerate it but it's interesting to watch the groups respond and move with it. I am thinking more that what we should be doing is collecting success stories and framing how they worked rather than trying to measure it in a metric sort of way for funders. I think actually good stories of success are equally effective with funders as well. And so I would rather keep the any kind of assessment process very under the radar because I think it would have more adverse effects. As soon as people know they're being quote measured, they freeze. And so I think just sharing successful stories and occasionally throwing in, oh, and here's one that was disastrous. So I think that might be more effective. Yeah, thank you. And Ken, does this mirror part of the discussion in Kiko lab? I mean, are we following similar paths? Well, that's the interesting thing about the conversation is that it is all over the place and people were getting kind of frustrated. And I said, this is actually really good because this is really tough stuff. And the teasing apart the context in which we're seeking collective intelligence, you can't just say we want to be collectively intelligent. It's got to be applied to something that has to be some kind of wet mess or problem we're attempting to work with. And so I think it's impossible to separate collective intelligence from the issue that the people are actually working on. And some people are like, no, no, we just need to have the, here's what we need to be collectively intelligent. But I disagree with that. I think it arises in the context of a wicked mess, for example, or a really nightly problem. And that brought up this whole conversation about where the Nazis collectively intelligent in their very effective killing machine. And I'm saying no, because the opposite of collective intelligence is groupthink. And so when you have a dictatorship that says, this is how you will think this is what you will follow, you are not being collectively intelligent no matter how ruthlessly and efficiently you are. So I can do a conversation about coordination and collective intelligence. It's very, very messy at the moment. And all I'm trying to do is rather than measurement as say, here are the things that I've observed in the last 30 years of facilitating groups and seeing some groups really thrive and some groups not do so well. This is what people as individuals bring. They bring a level of maturity to self-reflect and recognize when they've made a mistake or to recognize the impact that they have on others emotionally. Taking turns in conversation and being respectful. Interpersonally, having norm-setting conversations about what works to bring out the best in us and what works to drive us crazy so we can know that ahead of time and kind of circumvent that. And then the context, if we're working for an organization where we're creating our own, what norms and structures we wanna put in place that will support both individual and interpersonal so that we can get to collective intelligence. And I think it's gonna be a range. You're not gonna say, oh, we've got collective intelligence. So there's gonna be in some, emotionally intelligent was really good here, but we weren't so good on the collective side or relational intelligence needs to be moved. So I see it as a bunch of sliders. And that's where I'm coming at it from. Thank you. So we have a little detour. Doug, John, Julian about collective intelligence sort of feedback on the topic that can start and then we'll go back to our queue. But I wanna, before I pass to Doug, I just wanna say that Pete is doing presently what we recommended last week, which was he has turned his background using one of the virtual cams. He is showing us his note taking during the call. So if you feel like watching what he's doing, pin him, and then he will take over your screen. You can see big the notes that he's taking, but he's busy writing what he hears that we're talking about. And then Pete is the most maven maven in the world for me. And so he will likely be researching some of the things we talk about and dropping those in the notes. And he's also like one of the most brilliant multitaskers. So he may in fact be able to still feed our Mattermost chat and he was just on it. So if you wanna watch the art in progress, please pin Pete. Doug, the floor is yours. Well, probably a little redundant, but just to reinforce the limitations of measurement in comparison to good narratives and stories. The reduction of any field metric always avoids so much reality. And also a metric is very hard to change if you have some new phenomena enter into the field of consideration. So I'll just stop there. Thanks, Doug. John, Julian and then George and then we'll go back to the queue. Thank you. And this can be my intro. I mean, my check-in also will save time. So obviously there's a continuum. Several continue I hear that we're talking about. There's the formative summative evaluation continuum or that a lot of people are familiar with. And the kind of thing that Ken was talking about reminding me a lot of sort of going upstream. If you think of the summative, that's the last thing you wanna do. And I think you do wanna confine that carefully to things like, we've noticed some things have settled down and maybe we have to go for funding. So that's when you try to crank up the summative part. But before that, you stay very formative which is in the nature of, and it isn't, this word best practices gets really abused. What we're looking for are noticing things and we're looking for heuristics. And we're looking for, and Ken was talking about what might be called moderator behavior. And I think Doug made reference also to narrative. And so I mean, as part of my check-in, what I was gonna say was I've been watching clubhouse moderators. And first thing to say is nine out of 10 clubhouse events are, they might as well be keeping up with the Kardashians as far as I'm concerned, I'm not gonna go there. You just see the title and you know, this is not selling, getting more followers, becoming a successful blah, blah, blah, you know, nah, completely not interested. But about one in 10 conversations are quite substantive and they're tackling some difficult material, including what is wokeness and how does wokeness conflict with free speech. And that's a meaty one, that's a tough one. And so it's interesting to watch them struggle with that and to watch the better and the not so good moderators. I don't have any magic insight so far from watching them, except that the best ones do seem to be faster on the intervention, but they don't let things drag on, but the kind of intervention they do is very, gentle is the wrong word. The intervention they do is fast, but inclusive. It's like saying, we're appreciating, we're appreciating that. And we're putting in the context of this larger picture. And that keeps preventing it from going down the rabbit hole. It doesn't always work, but it's a behavior I would like to have. I would like to do it better myself, so I'm watching it very carefully. And that's kind of like what I've been doing as far as a check-in. You know, I'm also writing and trying to come up with the theory of macro entanglement for leadership, how leadership is macro entanglement, but that's a whole nother story. And I have spoken. Is anybody looking at paragraph in terms of a new platform for debate? It's just two people, not a group, but it's spelled paragraph with an extra I after the, so it's pair, a graph. Oh, I've not seen it. It's really very interesting. It's like a regular debate except in text and it's very thoughtful and not real time, but it's something to check out. So we have Jamie Joyce in this group occasionally who has United Debates of America, and we have other people who are argumentation experts and so forth, but I don't think, I'm gonna check my brain in a sec. I don't think I've heard of paragraphs, so thanks, Mike. Quick comments on collective intelligence from Julian and George, and then back to our cue. Julian, we can't hear you. You're not muted in Zoom, but you're not audible. Wonder if this microphone is finally dying. It's working now. All right, so that microphone is dead. Uh-oh, I think it's dead, Jim. Let's see. Oh, but now your voice is all chopped up, so we actually can't hear what you're saying. Just in this, can you, is this coming through okay? It's totally digitally artifacted to the point where you're hard to hear. Do you wanna find another curve here, or is there something you can plug them in? Okay, why don't we go to George and then come back to you in a sec? Go ahead, George. I have what might be a provocative and controversial thought. We don't like that kind of thing in here. Yeah, about collective intelligence. I don't think you're gonna measure collective intelligence because I think it's a myth. I think the whole idea of intelligence, perhaps, is a myth. I've studied intelligence as an educational psychologist for many years. I've given hundreds, maybe thousands, of intelligence tests. I'm coming around to the idea that I think the whole thing is a myth. The, with no doubt, observing certain things, we're observing varying degrees of mental efficacy, mental effectiveness. But the fact that we have to invent all these things, emotional intelligence and social intelligence, and Wexler himself, the granddaddy of all intelligence tests, the Wexler, is divided into two parts, verbal and performance. The fact that we had to invent all these intelligences tells me that perhaps I'm on the right track with mind skills, that I'm no smarter than other people. People have been telling me since I was a kid how smart I am. I don't think I'm smart or intelligent. I think I've mastered a cluster of mental skills that I've practiced more than other people. I spent a year learning creative problem solving, spent a year learning high-risk decision-making. I spent a year on various other kinds of things. I've just done more practice than other people. So I really question, and you can hear some of the hesitancy. I would give it 95% that the whole thing is a made up. It's like a mythical Greek god. They put a name on it with a capital I and a capital Q. They call it IQ, like it's a thing. It's not a thing. And it's a test score. And it does predict success in school. Benet's original test was brilliant. The best psychology test ever for predicting success in school, but not success in life. So that could be my check-in also. Also, by the way, I wanted to mention the other thing. My prediction, here first perhaps, the next big thing is gonna be spaces by Twitter. I've been on a few, I was invited to be a speaker on one. I spoke for 10 minutes on one. I got close to 100 new followers on Twitter, like within 10 minutes. It's crazy. And I got all kinds of things happening as a result of it, but it is a very interesting platform. And these audio platforms are gonna get bigger and bigger and bigger. As people learn to moderate. They don't have any idea how to moderate these things. That's a skill in itself. Anybody who's listened to or participated in a Twitter space, raise your hand in the screen. So none of the rest of us, just you, George. So I think we need to go run a little excursion, because everybody- Well, it's rolling out slowly. I don't have the ability to run my own yet. Man, I'm gonna do one probably every day on mind skills. And it's rolling out slowly. I've been invited to some and to speak on some from the Rome community. Because I'm technical idiot in Rome, but I'm really, really good at the thought algorithms part of Rome. So, I've kind of been welcomed into that community. But spaces, because it's so perfectly integrated with Twitter, it's gonna be absolutely gigantic. And we don't need to see each other. Audio in some ways is better than video. There are, that I've studied a lot. I'm the inventor of the telephone focus group, by the way. I've done thousands of focus groups without video. So I kind of know what I'm talking about here. It's not, video is not necessary. Audio is very freer and creates greater amount of psychological safety. So you're gonna see these audio things become gigantic. I'll stop there, sorry. So quick poll, who has participated in or just listened to Clubhouse, who has been on Clubhouse, raise your hand. So more than half of us. There's a famous old joke of our researcher talking to a little girl and he asks her, so which is your favorite? Which do you prefer, TV or radio? And her answer is radio, because the pictures are better. Whoa, that's great. Oh man, I'm gonna steal that. You may, it's ancient wisdom in the audio community. And also audio carries 80% number, because 63.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot. But audio carries like a huge proportion of the balance of human emotions and all of that. And it's also very intimate. And one thing I always marveled at in the days when we used to make a lot of phone calls is, you can whisper into the phone and effectively be inside the personal distance that we have to have when we're side by side in meat space. And so it can actually be more intimate than talking to a stranger or something else. It's really like audio is incredibly powerful. Also, without the video, people translate into what I call audio gestures. Uh-huh, yeah, mm, yeah, right. All that stuff. You can hear little people chuckle on audio in ways they don't on video. And as a moderator, I would always be able to say, hey, Jerry, I heard a chuckle. Jerry, can I speak to your chuckle for a moment? What's that chuckle trying to say to me? Although I will say that I love all the different cues I get from the crowd with jazz hands and whatever else. To me, as we're talking, I'm busy reading your expressions and whether you're leaning in, leaning out, doing whatever else. Let me go back to Julianne Peeth and Gil. So I actually wanted to go back, testing. Audio works great. I wanted to go back a few minutes to what Ken said about measuring intelligence and disagree that you need to do it in a context-sensitive way. There've been many times, I'm sure, everybody's experienced when you can think, well, that person over there is pretty intelligent and it doesn't matter whether they're speaking about physics or social development or anything. It's just somehow you tell. So this pushes back to the idea that you have to make sure that what you're measuring is something that you can measure. Otherwise, you end up conflating different aspects in the situation. Exactly. Really great. Pete Gilmike. Two things, one on intelligence and one on Twitter. It's an interesting assertion, George, that space is going to be the next big thing. My experience of Twitter is they can't get out of their own way fast enough to make anything the next big thing. So even if they've got the tech right, they have a hard time launching. There are some wonderful quarters of Twitter, though. So Twitter is my jam, Twitter is my social media and I've had this weird experience in the past month or so where somehow the internet has reached critical mass and I've curated a good list on Twitter every morning without fail. Within the first five minutes of scrolling through Twitter, I've got like five or six things that are just mind-blowingly cool and awesome. So the network effect of Twitter has certainly succeeded, but, and I'm still gonna use a word that my kids use where one of my kids, I'm still butthurt about Twitter shooting developers in the head. They did an amazingly horrible thing for their ecosystem, like mind-bogglingly horrible. They said, all the people who are helping us do a good job in the world, we hate you, we don't want you anymore, we're gonna shoot you in the head. And it's like, oh my God, it's like, anyway. Sorry, Pete, can you offer, like I think what you mean is when they eliminated all the Twitter clients, basically no more people using, offering a different front end to Twitter, but you probably mean something different than that. No, that's pretty close to what it is. And I don't remember the details and actually it's one of the things that I get emotional about and I've actually suppressed a bunch of the details. But basically what they did is they said, oh, it was the little bit deeper detail is they actually didn't tell all the third-party developers to go away. What they said is, congratulations, you're being too successful. We're gonna limit the number of users you can have to like a thousand or something like that. So if I've got a Twitter client that works better than their client, and the problem was they couldn't figure out how to monetize stuff. So it's like, oh my God, all these people are leaking subscribers away from the mainline client. Let's kind of tamp that down. Let's give them a thousand users or whatever. And so if I'm a client developer for Twitter, I've got this amazing client with a hundred thousand users. All of a sudden it's like, you can have all a hundred thousand users except for 99,000 of them. You can have a thousand. You can't have a business model because we don't care about your business model, we care about ours. And so it was even worse than just cutting it off. It was like, it was horrible. Anyway, not that I have PTSD about it or anything. So I hope they do, I hope they're amazingly successful with Spaces. It reminds me a little bit, by the way, in the news the past two days or so, Medium has made an interesting choice about the way that they're doing editorial and Ev Williams, who some of us know somewhat or back in the day we knew Ev really well. Ev Williams and Medium came up with a decision about how they're gonna handle editorial, which made nobody happy, I guess. I thought it was progress, but everybody's... Anyway, intelligence. George, I think that was a really interesting thing to say that intelligence is a phantom or something like that. As an outlier in intelligence, it's one of the things that I, in certain kinds of intelligence, there is certainly things that different people do differently that are either superpowers or super deficits. So some people experience that as dyslexia. Somehow my brain doesn't work so that I can get all the letters in a row and it pisses me off, and especially it's a handicap or a fault of us as a society when you equate spelling with intelligence. So I have a little bit of the, I have a superpower that's not like, it's the opposite of dyslexia kind of. Somebody asked me once, how do you spell these complicated words? I was always super grid speller in school and I didn't understand why I was better than other people. I just kind of took it as a given. It's like, okay, I guess I'm smart, whatever. That's what people say. Pete, you must be smart because you can spell words. That's not the only thing I can do, but anyway, the way I spell words, and I was totally shocked when somebody said, no, that's not a thing, is I close my eyes or now I mentally close my eyes and I just read it off like it's on a blackboard. And that's a kind of intelligence or it's, I don't know, it's not really intelligence. It's kind of a superpower. Visual memory. I have, and I have visual memory for things like words, and so my friend said, that's not a thing, Pete. I close my eyes, I don't see any words. I have to kind of stumble along and kind of sound it out of my head and kind of try to figure out what, the stupid way English spells a word. So kind of the same thing. There are things that I can do that are good and bad. I can multitask really well. I can do a bunch of things at once. Another thing that I do that makes me look smart or intelligent is that I can make connections quickly and I notice things very quickly. I can observe things that happen faster than it seems like a lot of people do. So the deficit for that of me is that I've kind of got some kind of ADHD, right? Where if it can be that I'm making connections fast enough that I get distracted from what people are talking about or what's going on in the world. Another really hard part of that kind of an ADHD kind of thing is if I don't have enough intellectual stimulation going on, I get, it's hard for me to pay attention. So it wasn't until just recently that I realized the way that I did super well in school, partly because I have other kinds of intelligence as well but the ADHD kind of intelligence meant that I literally sat right in front of, at the front of the class next to the teacher's desk so he or she could be looking down and seeing what I'm doing. As I'm getting A's, I am doodling or drawing things upside down and backwards or I'm doing weird stuff on the notes just so that I can keep paying attention to what's going on with the teacher, right? So there's, and so now in a Zoom call, what I'm doing is I've got a bunch of different things going on on my screen and that's what I do. So there's certainly, and then other people, I watched somebody blow me away once by chit chatting with, it was kind of in a VC-ish setting but it was somebody who has a high, what you would call, what the best name that we have for it right now is emotional intelligence, EQ or something like that. But I watched a person who interfaces with the VC's really well, I'll talk to a couple other people who interface with VC's really well. This is somebody I worked with a lot and he always had trouble keeping up with me doing my connection thing really fast. I could make connections and he would try to outgun me and he would say, so we've observed this and this and this, so that means that and I'm like, okay, well, I'm ahead of you that way. It actually means these couple of other different things that you haven't even thought about that. You're going to realize that you're not thinking about in 10 or 15 minutes. I can do that super fast. I watched him sitting around a cafe table talking with a couple other people and they were talking about VC's and other founders and things like that and what was going on socially. Oh, you should talk to this person and it turns out that that person would be really interested in the way that these folks that you know are working together and they were constructing this mental model of like social network, you know, like plus, plus, plus kind of that I could keep up with what they were trying to do but I realized that I felt stupid the way that my friend felt stupid when I outgunned him in some kind of like architectural discussion. He completely outgunned me in this EQ thing where they were like figuring out how to approach other people in a way that would get them funding or help another founder or whatever, right? So there's this, we all have different intelligences and intelligences may be the wrong word for those but we have these different, I've come to think of it as neurology. Another really interesting neurology is the way that we interface with, some people have no problem with a screen and a face. I am like that. There are other people who a screen and a face is like, I don't know what I'm doing here. I can't see them. They're not, you know, they're not with me. I can't, you know, for whatever reason, the interaction doesn't work. We used to, in one of my companies, we had a person who literally could barely be on the phone and certainly could not screen share but if you talk to them quietly in a room together with them, they were like the smartest person around, right? As soon as you dragged them out of that ability to interface with people face to face in a room, their intelligence went to like 80. You know, it was like they couldn't operate and they look stupid. So there's something interesting there, George. I appreciate the opening and there's some really interesting neurology. We're all different and that neurology kind of gets squashed into a measurement of intelligence or now a measurement of book intelligence and EQ. There's a lot more than that. So still on our tangent about collective intelligence, let's go to Gil, Mike, me and then back to the queue and we have a couple of people who have to leave at the top of the hour. So I wanna make sure to catch them. So I'll reorganize the queue, but go ahead, Gil. Yeah, thank you. This is fascinating. I noticed that Pete's multitasking brilliance doesn't extend to scribing his own speaking. Oh, crazy. I have to work on that, Pete. Twitter clearly is not demonstrating collective intelligence to Pete's point. I'm struck that it seems that we fetishize learning and adaptation as intelligence. We sort of call everything intelligence. I hear people lately talking about intelligent molecules or intelligent, you know, intelligent immune systems when it's the adaptive behavior of the system that we call intelligence as a cognate for whatever it is that we're thinking of is going on our heads. Maybe it's more something like the capacity to move and adapt in the world. And I like what George was saying about skills. I would think about it as capacities. I don't look at Michael Phelps and think I'm not as smart as him. You know, he has spent, you know, like 20 hours a day in the pool for his entire life. He's developed capability in his body to do things that are, you know, cultivated and learned over time. To the neurology thing, Pete, it's not, the exciting thing here is that that's not fixed. It's plastic. Neurology changes and adapts. And we're actually in real time now modifying each other's neurobiology neurochemistry right now. And if you wanted to measure it, you could measure it. And I wonder if measurement is an artifact of industrial society. And the hunger to be able to predict and control human behavior, which goes up in the school testing and in how we manage workplaces. And the, you know, the move of saying, Pete, your guy has said, I'm going to adapt my management to your cognitive style as opposed to try to test your regiment, you evaluate, you fit you into an official cognitive stylist, you know, is a big move and very rare. Michael Phelps is a really interesting example. He's one of what my wife and I call freaks of nature. We don't mean that in a negative way. I'm a freak of nature with the way that I can spell words. No matter how much I try, how much I do exercises just like Michael Phelps, I'm never going to have the wingspan that he does to pull water. So. And so Stephen Curry's made you a better example. So he, you know, he's done 300 free throws before every game. Just as part of his practice. And so, oh my God, what a thing he's able to shoot three-pointers, you know, at whatever percentage he hits them because he's developed in his body the ability to do that. Let's go to Mike. Mike, then Kevin, hang on. I'm going to cut you in the queue pretty soon unless you want to. I just have something on this topic that would be useful. So let's go to Mike, then you, then me, and then back to the queue. I was just going to go on the topic and say that there is a lot of nonverbal communication that happens even on Zoom. I make a point of doing at least one or two phone calls a day because otherwise Zoom fatigue gets really, really too much. And I guess Citibank has decided that Friday is Zoom free. Everybody has to do phone calls. But for those people who aren't like me and really do read people's faces and can do the nonverbal, Zoom has been very powerful and better than phones. So there's another intelligence there. Yeah. Kevin, then me. My brother was a elementary school teacher fourth grade and he was a math mentor to other elementary school teachers around the state. And he, you know, has research that says there's eight kinds of math thinking. And I was really bad at arithmetic, but there's a kind of math where, and it's working for me in business where if you see the deal that's at the table on your side and the deal that's at the table on the other person's side and you see the highest thing between you is actually a kind of math that I'm really good at. And when I've been in groups that are doing things and then I'm not in the next meeting, all they can see is what's present as opposed to the collective future value, which is a kind of math thinking. And it was really great for me because I always thought I was like bad at math. And, you know, it turns out I'm bad at arithmetic, but at like this one of the eight kinds of math I'm really good at. It's just, you know, seeing the collective future value between us. And it's really weird when I'm not in the negotiations, the other people who are in the room, all they can see is what's in front of them and instead of, you know, what's in the future between them. So that's the end of that. So a couple of things just to add to this topic and then I'll go back to our cue. One is I put in the chat earlier, I thought it from my brain called types of intelligence and there's become a whole sub-industry of coining new types of intelligence, writing a great book about it, and then like off we are to some new theory. Sure sign it's a myth. Well, it's also a sign that it's become industrialized and the first measure of intelligence, the intelligence quotient is really controversial. And at this point is being debunked and disarmed and all those kinds of things. But these things make their way into the culture. So, and then I've been in a couple recent conversations or following a couple of conversations online about consciousness and panpsychism and all that. And it's like, is everything actually conscious? There was a recent article I read that panpsychism is crazy, panpsychism, which is everything has consciousness. It's crazy, except it's probably right. Because if the default setting that that might be true is easier than trying to explain like everything without it. And this is all, that philosophical conversation is beyond my pay grade. But I wanted to add to this notion of is there collective intelligence? Sort of two other things like it for me. One of them is in barbershop quartet singing, there's something called the bird. And when a barbershop is really harmonizing well, when they're just grooving, you hear like a fifth tone over their voices. Cause there's only four people singing, and barbershop quartets were always men, sweet out of lines were always women. But the bird is this sort of over note, overtone that you hear when they're really harmonizing well. And I think there's also something like that in jazz and other places. But I think there's a sense of grooving, right? That where everybody's in tune, everybody's resonating, everybody's collimated energy, whatever that might be. And then the second thing is similar to that, the sense of community and my own take on sense of community is that even when you have a deep feeling of sense of community in an incident, in an instance with other humans, that doesn't mean everybody in the group did. And several people in the group might in fact feel rejected and left out or ignored or left behind or whatever. And so sense of community is this weird evanescent thing that comes and goes over time and that doesn't touch everybody equally. But sometimes we're involved in places, conversations or teams over time where we're like, oh damn, that was a special moment and a special group and a special space and a special set of conversations. And we realize that. And I think that's really important. And again, measuring it has strange sort of sense as a strange effects on the process. A long time ago, I was quoted somewhere saying that online communities are like mushrooms. They thrive in dark spaces. And the moment like when community got big back in the early 90s, sort of online community got big, everybody pointed to the well as the paradigmatic online community. And the best days of the well were well behind it. And then lots of people rushed to the well and basically ruined it. And so these things don't port very easily. So measurement is kind of controversial that way. And then the last thing I wanna add to this notion of intelligence is I've had several interesting discussions in particular on ongoing one about, is Trump intelligent? And I did a video saying, Trump is sort of smarter than we think he is. And using any of those words, smart, intelligent, whatever, just like opens up a can of worms. It's really fun to try to put back together. You can't. But if you say street smart, gangster smart, mobster smart, anything like that, you get a little bit closer to the issue. But there's a bunch of things that he did over time to survive in the way he acts in the world, which is not a way I recommend anybody act in the world that indicate to me that he's smarter than we think he is. And that his persona as the dumb greedy billionaire, which is a better caricature of that than Thurston Howell III, I will point out, he does a better job of greedy wealthy dude than Gilligan's Island's caricature of that person is intentional. It's like a crafted persona that he then sort of climbed into and that ate his brain somehow, I don't know. So anyway, those are my thoughts on the topic. And I've reorganized the queue a little bit to adapt for people who need to leave. So Mike back to you, then Trey, Kevin and Matt. Just a couple of things. I think most people know there's gonna be some interesting fireworks starting in about five minutes on Capitol Hill. The big tech CEOs are all testifying about disinformation, hate speech, censorship, dot, dot, dot. It'll probably be even more uninformed than usual. But the reason I wanted to grab a few minutes is just to challenge everybody. On Monday, we were supposed to have a small private discussion with the head of two of the key people at the top think tank in China for international relations. And there were three of us presenting one on trade, one on military conflict and how to avoid it. And then I was gonna talk on technology. And this could be even more rossious than the recent meeting in Anchorage. But I'm trying to find a way to kind of say, hey, let's re-characterize these debates over technology. A lot of my focus will be on the metaphors and the mindsets that we use and how we can find some better ones. Tech Cold War, AI Arms Race, Chinese are always using war metaphors when they talk about technology, the technology front and the shock troops. And we're not any better. We've done a lot of this as well, but my plea is that we start talking about sports and not thinking of this as a boxing match where our goal is to knock them out or to set them back. Our goal is to have a running race where we can both set records. And ideally, we have a relay race where the US can team up with other people. But I'd love to hear your thoughts on tweetable ideas, just memes to get in their head, things that they might repeat that will change minds. One of my other memes is going to be stop thinking about data as the new oil. Just, I've talked about this before, but this is driving a lot of the Chinese policy makers. They adopted this from the economists. This is one of the memes that's in their head. They need data dominance and hoarding data is where the power is. I'm hosting a panel on that topic in a couple of weeks as part of the conference on World Affairs through CU Boulder virtually this year. So I wish you were one of my panelists, Mike, on the topic. Let me be a fly on the wall if there's a way I can listen in. Yeah, I like to say that data is the new air. It needs to flow across borders, recycle, get filtered, reuse, combined. The new soil perhaps as well. Soil is okay, but data moves faster than soil. The worst one I've heard is that data is a new plutonium. Oh, great. Yeah, that it's very, very, very dangerous if spilled or misused. I also like data is the new avocado. It spoils quickly, but it tastes good. Well, that's really good. I like it. It's like that cartoon, like not quite done, not quite done, not quite done, not quite done. Ooh, too late. The last meme I'd share is Vince Surf who says, information is power, but information sharing is far more powerful. But somehow we've got to break through about five or six of these memes and mindsets that are getting in the way of smart policymaking and cooperation both here in the US. And I only have like six or seven minutes. So I really am gonna do a series of tweets and just try to leave that to percolate. And framing is extremely powerful. It is, but we don't, we don't focus on it. Think tanks that we write 30-page papers. We don't realize that at the end of the day, somebody who reads the paper will probably take home two or three tweets. Might as well give them the tweets up front. Matt, did you wanna jump into this topic? Yeah, I think I wanted to connect back to a, it was just a flare that got shot up by Gil a little bit earlier as we were talking about measurement and something that was introduced to me years ago by Doug. Is, I think the question is we're trying to attack like sort of traditional ways of thinking with these memes that are built in the same language of the traditional ways of thinking. And we might be so far down the path of building mental models based on the industrial revolution and the enlightenment that we might need to step way back in this process and kind of recognize that sort of this tweaking around the edges is not the way forward. I was recently in Florida, we were out in the inter-coastal. And the interesting thing about the inter-coastal is that the sands under the water shift very frequently. And if you go too fast in a direction, the water gets a lot shallower and you see a lot of people who just wanna just kind of hope and move forward. And that progress is this notion of moving forward. And what Doug introduced earlier on is that I think our notions of forward and backwards might be completely misguided. And so as you're looking for memes, maybe the meme is something that is out of context, not an extension of or a reframing of our existing context. And I don't know how that plays. The last thing I'll just say about collective intelligence and we can debate about the word intelligence and we use language for a lot of different things and we create these fat words to mean things, right? We talk about emotional intelligence, which just means that we're sensitive, right? But I think that there is something that happens when groups of people come together in the collaborative form where things emerge out of it, whether it's the bird or whether it's something else that can't be described and shouldn't be described, shouldn't be measured. And you wanna walk out of a collaboration and go, I know I was a part of it, an important part of it, but I can't name the thing that it is that I contributed versus what other people contributed. That the end product is something that is unique to the group, but it is not discernible and dividable and distinguishable to each of the members of the group. Because if you try to do that, then you force yourself into cooperation models where everyone is a role, everyone is a machine, you can pull people in and out versus when you get into that place of group genius, the birds show up and we should just recognize it for the beauty that it is. So that's where I'm at with this conversation. Thank you. Yeah, well, I think in the case of US China, the word that always comes out front is competition. Yeah. Comic competition, military competition, ideological competition. The interesting comment going into Anchorage was from our Secretary of State saying, we are going to compete. We have to find places to cooperate and we have to be ready to confront. But no one's talking about the collective. No one's actually talking about going beyond cooperation and coordination to something much deeper. How do we collaborate to create the birds that we need in this world that's gonna save us from our own destruction? I mean, that's where we're at. And I think that's why I'm in OGM is my hope is that we start to figure out those sorts of things, you know? Like our language is so damaging and it's based on these models that we take for granted because we've been living them for so long. And that's my awakening from this group. And I really appreciate that. Ken, hold on one second. Kevin, do we lose you at the top of the hour? No, not today. Okay, excellent. Cause I was gonna try to grab you before you had to bolt. Although then let's go to Ken and then we'll go back to the queue. Really quick, as I'm listening to Mike and, you know, the China, US thing and the competition and confrontation and all this. It occurs to me, this is really male-based amygdala bullshit, you know? And what we need here, you know, one of the things that the Thomas Malone in the Center for Collective Intelligence, MIT came up with is you add women to the team, you get more collective intelligence. And women have developed an evolutionary approach called tendon befriend, which is, okay, there's not an immediate threat here, but there's a threat. So let's take care of the people who feel threatened. Let's give them blankets and food and hugs so they feel comforting. And let's go over there to that threat and say, what do you want? We see you as a threat. Let's talk this out. So I think we need a way more feminine approach. This, we've brought ourselves to the brink of fucking ecological and every other kind of disaster you can think of with males running things. We just need to start to be way softer and way more receptive, much to put it in Chinese terms, a lot more yin, we're way over yang. That's awesome. Ken, that's really important and thank you for sort of reloading that in my head. I'll put the tendon befriend response link in my brain in the chat. That's hugely important. When Liberia, sort of when a sex strike ended the Civil War in Liberia, I was wishing that the next government would be only women, like that no man would be allowed into the government for 10, 20 years, something like that. I think it might have been pretty helpful. Hi. Hi, you're all set? Doug, do you mind muting your mic? Right here if you need me. I'm not the host of this call so I can't actually mute him from here. At least I don't think I can. Nope. So let's go Trey, Kevin, Matt. Now I know why I like reconnecting on these calls. Good morning or good afternoon wherever it is, either of you are. So no commentary on what's been shared. I think there's just really beautiful ideas and really beautiful willingness to play. I think about the only thing I would add in might be around this whole idea of a capacity to adapt might also be a capacity to receive and specifically receive what we don't know yet beyond our current filters. And so just kind of a nugget to throw in there for to chew on. For me, from a check-in place, I have been cocooning and I have been really, really blessed in the midst of that cocooning and part of it has been because of connection to this group. Harm Jitt who in her own intuitive wisdom which she will deny, set up a call on the very first day of January, which for me was 9 a.m. And so you can kind of imagine 9 a.m. on January 1st, me going, do I really want to do this call? Especially in the state that I was in at that time, which was pretty raw, but I attended that call. And long story short, Harm Jitt and Mila Aliana and myself wound up taking the Centropic Enterprise course together out of Australia with Christine McDougall. And we just finished it. It was an eight week course and we just finished it together. And it was one of the most affirming experiences I've had in the long term. So that has been amazing. And all three of us are currently also taking right now, we are three weeks in to a four week course in the fair shares commons with Graham Boyd. And I understand Jerry that you connected with Graham and that I was able to make that connection happen. So I'm really grateful for that. Good. Great call with him yesterday. Lovely, lovely. Yeah, he had nothing but good things to say about you two. So I'm really grateful that that occurred. And yeah, I'm just grateful to be here. And I also want to extend some gratitudes and absentia to both Jay Golden and to Scott Moore Maureen. Yeah, Maureen, yeah. Seriously, beautiful, beautiful men and Ken. I know that you haven't sort of played with us in the last few weeks, but that initial stuff that you sent us at the beginning of the, I had sent out sort of like a call out to these three gentlemen to say, we need a little bit of help. And each of these men in their own way very unconditionally said, okay, I can't do this, but I can do this. And let me throw this in your direction and maybe this will help. And seriously, it made an otherwise perceptive rats nest to put it nicely, unweave itself in a way that is creating some clarity that hasn't existed for 13 years. So I just really want to say thank you, which is my number one reason for being here today. And I look forward to being on the call more frequently again and as I'm getting my feet under me. So thank you. Hey, thank you so much. Could you put a link to the Centropic workshop that you talked about in the chat so we know what that was? You want it in this chat here in the Zoom? Are you on the Mattermost at all? I am not on the Mattermost at this time. Put it in the Zoom chat and we shall cut and paste the very advanced technology that will make this all work out in the end. Sounds great, really appreciate it. And Lauren is showing us some of those night sky in Europe. I mean, evening sky. Yes. Judy, oh, good, thank you. Perfect timing. So let's go back to our cue. Trey, thank you so much. That was, I have a lot of having you back in the room. So I've got, and I've probably missed a couple because our check-in has been kind of popcorn kind of all over the place. But I've got Kevin, Matt, Mark, Michael, and Klaus who we have not gotten yet to. And I'm pretty sure I'm missing a couple people. And Kevin is putting a GoFundMe thing for his project in there if anybody wants to go do that. So let's go to, Kevin, we can't hear you. Okay. Yes, now you're good. Okay, yeah, good. Hi. Yeah, things are moving along on the stuff I've been reporting on. We raised 20,000 before this week for the friends and family funding for entrepreneurs who don't have a rich uncle. We're $750 away from a $5,000 that will get us $150,000 in two matches. I just put it in the GoFundMe or in the OGM if anybody's interested. And we're in pilots in three cities to do this through three churches that gets black kids and white kids designing the future together with a annuity revenue stream around. It's kind of a sweet little thing. And I'm pretty jazzed about it. We're getting $150,000 from Trinity Wall Street which is this church that owns, they used to be the largest landowner in Manhattan. Now I think they're number two and because they've converted to liquid assets. But anyway, we had a staff meeting this morning and one of our first people was saying, this land, this one. I said, wait, what can you do? He says, oh, remember, we're getting some money. It's like, oh, like we're actually planning this bootstrap startup with some money coming in. And so it's like, oh, but that was, it was like, I had to rethink everything. It's like, okay, well, that's pretty cool. But the, so things are good. One of the things I looked at when I was investing, impact investing was looking at the additional social capital that showed up at the right time around the startups. And so we are at the place of needing somebody who just showed up. He's a credit analyst in a bank and who's been reading my blog and wants to be engaged because he grew up with his father in Madagascar doing microfinance. And so we need somebody who is a technical process plumbing builder. As we hook up these things of a donation from a church to a donor advice fund out to a community development corporation into a CDFI. It's like, I could be really good at the first one and be bored and not do the others. And so when the social capital is attracted to the right smart people who are gonna give their time, that's a really good marker for me. And money's coming as well, but when the right smart volunteer with a real passion to, he wants to do a lot more than be a credit analyst at a bank, he wants to be doing what his father's doing. So anyway, it's really great that that's happening. So I'm just, I'm in a good place with this stuff. And I'm also having a big conversation back and forth with my daughter who's a West Asheville anti-vaxxer and who doesn't realize this is not like not taking a mumpshot. And I, it's difficult to be close to somebody who's, you know, their school got profiled. It's a Waldorf school in the New York times last year for its regular anti-vaxxer that a year before last, I guess, you know, for the measles mumps thing. And they helped the measles outbreak grow, but they didn't have essential oils. And this is more serious than that. I just don't know how to deal with that across, you know, she's suggesting we get a therapist in and she wants to present me phony anti-vaxx facts. And I'll say, well, I'll try to be respectful to your fringe hippie, do you want my craziness without acting like it's fringe hippie craziness when I talk to my daughter. So anyway, if anybody has dealt with that, I'd love to, I'm not sure what to do. She's really smart, but they just think this thing that fringe hippie folks think. So Linda in our last call presented some correspondence that she'd been in recently about the vaccine and, you know, vaxxed outers, anti-vaxxers, whatever. I think this is a super interesting and very OGME kind of question. So I don't know how to answer it right this second, but I have a feeling we should focus on it some to see if we can create either spaces or resources or inquiry process or something like that, but not to get the best medical facts on why the vaccine works and all that, but to crack the code a little bit or to attempt to crack the code on why people are so resistant to shifting their minds on this. Yeah, I mean, when they gave us as a housewarming present a rose quartz because it would be an embodyer of love. You know, I did an afternoon of work and that actually is not out of the question. Rose quartz can be sensitive to pressure. It can be sensitive to chemicals. It can be sensitive to electricity. It can be sensitive to waves of different kinds and there are brainwaves. So I said, okay, I can accept it. You know, like it's actually possible that, you know, you can change the vibration of rose quartz lots of different ways. But this other stuff, I don't know what to do. You know, like, I mean, he's going to have a lot of these conspiracy anti-vaxxer facts she wants me to look at. And I just, you know, I don't know. And the act of looking at them and talking, going depth first into the research may actually be part of getting to a different conversation. I'm forgetting what the article was, complexifying the issue. Is that Adam Grant? I've got the article somewhere, but there was a very, very nice article about complexifying as a way of getting through these conversations as opposed to the usual binary. You must, we can't kind of set up. Yeah. Yeah, my opening thing is like, well, you realize you'll be killing people which didn't work well as an opening. I can't see why that wouldn't have just gone over right away, like winning. That sounds like a kill shot to me, right? I said, you'll be causing people to die anyway. So I'm back off of that. That was, anyway, that was, that was bad. And I'm sure they didn't like that. Yeah, I know. I know, it's just anyway. Okay. So the cue I have is this, and I may have missed people. I'm not sure, and we may not be able to get through it because several of us have to bounce off the call at the half hour. So let's give that a try. Kevin, thank you for putting the link. And Gil, thank you for donating. That's wonderful. Really appreciate it. Matt, Mark, Michael. Since I had a chance to speak earlier and I appreciate you guys listening to my rant, I'll keep this short. I think the thing that I wanted to just state is I've been working these OGM ideas and concepts into conversations with one of my major clients that I've been working with and helping to change for the last decade and a half now. And last night, I got green light in the six-figure mark to start building some of these capabilities in-house. So it's great. I'll be reaching out to some folks, but I think some of the underlying things that we've been talking about have resonance in a world that I think a lot of us or in a world that would be easy to give up on. So the transition is starting to happen and I think it starts with expanding what people think about and expanding what people look at while making those decisions that they make in their organizations. And I think, I believe in the Gandhi quote that awareness is responsibility. And so it's about creating systems that build higher levels of awareness. So excited to report that there's fruitful not only for me, but fruitful for a client. And then hopefully that generates some revenue that we can bring back into the fold. So excited about that. That's awesome, Matt. Congratulations. Love that. Love that. Mark Michael Klaus. Yes, good morning, everyone. Bonjour. Bonjour. Well, so many topics, so many wonderful things that what intelligence is. And it brings a little extra for everyone, for me and two levels. Two of my kids have been asked about their elementary and probably half of middle school if they had a DHD, that I should get them tested. Until the day I said to one of these teachers, yeah, he got tested. Of course he did not. But her eyes just like, who, what was the first call? And she says, so what? And I said, well, he's a eight year old kid who would love to be climbing trees instead of sitting for seven hours in the classroom. That's simple. And intelligence in itself, yeah, I completely thank you, George, for your take on that. It's, I agree with you. And the realization I got from that intelligence is just again another projection of our mind wanting to construct everything and divide. We're so good at that. We're so good at that. Oh yeah. And it works so well. It works so well all the time. Absolutely. It's with these people. They're amongst the smartest people that I could smart, right? That I've ever met. And I wanted to show you guys a picture of one of my friends. He has probably the writing skills of a five grader. But when you see it and listen to him, you're just going to listen for two hours and not speak a word because you're so scared of interrupting this flow of knowledge, of understanding of the world. And that brings me to an update of what I'm doing. I've been invited by a couple of tribes, nations in Brazil to implement some value creation processes on their knowledge and natural resources. And I really do hope to get vaccinated before I go. And I just want to point out that, I just want to point out that Mark is deeply involved in many conversations with indigenous people in many places and that I would love to engage us more in that. And I think that means us going to those conversations. And so Mark, if you can suggest to us places to meet you calls that we might join that would be useful in this, I would appreciate that. And that one of the lessons I learned from one of the calls we were both on was that, A, indigenous wisdom is often not to be taken. It's often guarded carefully, less to be misused. But B, and not different from, but it's often intertwined with language and culture in ways that are very hard to extricate. So when a language expires, with it sometimes goes a worldview and a bunch of knowledge that was hard won over millennia. And so, and which also implies that understanding the wisdom, the knowledge involves mastering the language, et cetera, et cetera, which you're like, oh crap, okay. And so I think that there's like layers of complexity here that are a super interesting, hard to entangle and don't reduce themselves easily to, oh good, let's just send the knowledge engineer to talk to the indigenous wise folk and download what they know into a database. Like that ain't the formula here. It's very different from that. But thank you for being here and bringing. Yeah, and you're referring to Marcus, Briggs, yeah, linguist. Exactly. We said, if the number of words that is used in the language goes below 3000, then you start losing the meaning of the language itself. And there were only a couple of native speakers, the language left alive. Actually, there were more, but they lost a lot due to COVID. Right, and that's what's happening up there. So thank you, Mark. Michael Klausgill-Loran. Well, I won't be long, given our limited time. I did wanna say one thing on what came up earlier about audio versus video and say that one thing I found really interesting of late, I've been involved in a lot of conversations in digital space that involved audio and visuals that were not visuals of people's faces, whether it was a mirror board or a screen share that happened to be going on that just allowed people to really collaborate and be, well, just to get visual information across, ideally with everybody having a hand on the stylists or the mouse or the contributing to the visual product. I don't think that that interaction has been well implemented. I mean, mirror boards particularly can be great and can be extremely maddening. So I'm very curious about what other tools people have found there, but also just pushing the idea that there are ways to be present with voice and not completely non-visual. And then I just wanted to share what's going on with me. Wanted to just appreciate a lot of one-on-one conversations and one-on-two conversations I've been having lately with people, a couple of them here, and just getting so much out of it. I am someone who has a fair amount of stage fright and discomfort and with talking and it's harder the larger the group gets. And at the same time, I've really enjoyed listening in this larger group space and wanted to just wanted to say that. I mean, if anybody's interested in one-on-one talks, I'm up for that. I also wanted to talk about some related group conversations I've been having. There's a group that I'm sure somehow must overlap this one called the, hold on, it's this, sounds like collaborative technologists alliance. And there are some people who are doing some stuff that I mean, I talked to Pete a little bit about Jim Fournier who I think others of you know who's doing true.net and J-Link is something that he's been involved in. And he actually hooked me up to this group. There are other people in that group who represent other platforms, collaborative intelligence, devotees, I just feel like we should know about their existence. And if I only end up being some linkage there, I'll try and bring back what ideas I can share and links I can put in Mattermost. Yeah, so I guess that's all for me right now. Thanks, Michael. I put a link in the Mattermost chat. I don't know if that's the right group you're talking about. Yeah, but it is. Cool, thank you. Klaus Gil-Laura. Yeah, coming back to this intelligence discussion. I was in a conversation yesterday with the Holus group. It's mostly Europeans. Discussion group centered around Jan Smatz. Jan Smatz was the advisor to Mahatma Gandhi. And the discussion was focused on consciousness. How do you define what is it? And is consciousness present in nature itself? And coming to the awareness that all of life has connections and is there an intelligence that is thriving this life? And so this discussion is reflecting, I think, a growing awareness that we are obviously in trouble with the natural world that is governing all of life on the planet. And that also reflected in a lot of conversations now focused on the amazing damage that we have caused already and how these linkages need to be better understood. I'm working with the district fund organization right now on another webinar to help other sectors in the economy understand how you are in the transportation sector or in the financial sector or in the energy sector, how you need to understand what is happening in land, roads and agriculture that you are impacting and that you need to understand in order to modify your approach. Right now we are thinking and working in sectors and we are highly specialized in sectors. We don't have this intuitive understanding of this is a system. So this discussion around what is collective intelligence, what is consciousness is really, I think, the beginning of a conversation that allows us to step back and see a living impact I mean, a living connection that we need to be aware of. I mean, it's hard to put into words, but I think just to understand what is consciousness and I have like a very simplified practical way to think about it, but obviously it goes into a whole different dimension when you start to think about is our animals conscious or our plants conscious or is there a connecting consciousness that pulls it all together? So. Oh, thank you for that. Yeah, it's funny. Like, okay, we're right close to the end of this call. I'm gonna have to get off in a minute or two and I just wanna talk for another hour about what you just put on the table. So there we are. That's what OGM calls are supposed to be like. Gil and Lauren and we're not gonna be able to cover all of you, but let's give it a swing. And this is tough. So I've been spending an hour every week in the reading group, loosely called a philosophy reading group that's talking about class, the questions that you're asking. So I'm deep into that, I would love to talk with you and Jerry, whoever more about that. Maybe the whole thing is conscious and maybe what we call consciousness is some way of participating in that business. Yeah, long, many rabbit holes. First of all, just huge gratitude. I'm loving OGM, where you guys been all my life. I'm so happy to be here. I look forward to this call every week. So there's that. News of me, paying a lot of my professional attention is around climate finance and how do we pay for the world that we want? And in that area as well as everything else about climate, everything that's going on is woefully inadequate. The scales are completely mismatched. Just figured out yesterday that we spend, the planet spends about 2% of global GDP on military. Most of that, like two thirds of that from six countries. We spent last year, 10% of global GDP on COVID. We spent about a half percent on climate that will change big time. In that realm personally, some of you know I've been building an investment fund or starting to build an investment fund around sustainability turnarounds. I'm this week making an offer to my chief investment officer. So that's gonna move from theoretical to starting to go into action. Excited about that. Congratulations. Thank you. Well, premature, but thank you. Premature congratulations. Thank you. The other piece in that, in my entrepreneurship zone is, I've been cooking for a while and building an academy around, around cultivating leaders and enterprises that can address this world that we're moving into. And I'm very challenged right now with the emergence of Clubhouse and the many, many other platforms where people are in dialogue and exploration and learning together. And wondering sort of where to fit in that universe or how to leverage those universes. To the previous conversation about Clubhouse, what I'm missing there is what we do here, which is side chats. I love the audio, but I can't be sitting there in a, remember when we would sit in theaters and watch things, you poke the person next to you and say, hey, what about that? I'm missing the multi-layered texture. So you may not be using the chat very effectively then because there's a, there's a, oh, and Clubhouse totally, yes. Clubhouse is really, really limited in the U.R. Yeah, and it's interesting in certain ways. So I'm feeling surely the missing of that. And I'm wondering if anyone's done Clubhouse and Zoom rooms together. And shortly, John, yes. And then we have to close the call because we're right at one minute before the half. So go ahead, John. Not Clubhouse and Zoom. I mean, people are possibly doing that. But what I know about is that certain strong groups, strong Clubhouse groups have a webpage with a specifically open up and running parallel to, just like we do with Mattermost. So there's a Mattermost equivalent on Clubhouse. It would be really easy to run Clubhouse with Mattermost. That would be what you're going to do. That might be one way to do it. But then Zoom gets you the visual. So, yeah, so check in. Jane got jabbed yesterday. That's good. I've been double jabbed already. Our life is complicated because she's also in a post stem cell transplant. Right. Building immune system processing. Bidelines don't quite exactly tell us what to do and nobody seems to know. But it's good. It's progress in that direction. I'm back into the brain again, Jerry. This is my periodic attempts to make this part of my life. So thank you. I'm having a great time. Good. I may want to bother you with some questions. I've got a whole bunch of things I wanted to share about fertile explorations in my life and fertile discomforts. And I guess it'll have to wait till next time. Why don't we start with you next week? I'll be more of them, no doubt. Sounds great. Lauren, my apologies. Let me just say one, because that may resonate with a bunch of people here. I am working to drop the word nature from my vocabulary. Interesting. Because we modernists tend to speak of nature as this thing outside of us. More and more people are saying, no, no, we're nature too. So I'm practicing dropping the word nature and therefore also the word natural resources and therefore maybe the word natural capital. And it goes to the dance that I'm in that maybe many of us are in of straddling worlds and bringing different faces and different languages to the different worlds that we're in. Enough to debate you on that, Gil. What about natural logic? We have to close this call. Yeah. And this is a juicy, juicy topic. Way too rich. This is like eating like a mouthful of baklava at the end of a meal. I was like, oh man, that's way too rich. Thank you all. This has been phenomenal. See you on the intertubes. And more soon. Thank you. Bye everybody. Take care, be well. Who said what about natural logic? Me. With me. Ken. I can't see. Brilliant, thank you. Well, I know that would be close to your heart, Gil. I mean, work on it, Ken. Considering it's the name of your company, I think you might want to be thinking about that. Yeah. Well, the origin of the name which came from Jane was out of the spirit of these questions, but it's a great flag. And you and I, my brother, are long overdue. We're overdue for a walk. Hey, we've been double jabbed. I'll have my immunity inside of two weeks here. So let's, now we know where to meet at the dog park instead of ops. And it might be separate conversations. I'd love to have conversations with each of you individually, but I've also been double jabbed and I'd love to join you on that walk. All right. That makes sense. Different topics to take up with both of you. Michael, good to hear from you today. Thanks. I'm gonna jump guys, thank you. Take care, bye-bye. Take care.