 It is Wednesday, February 12th, 2020. This is our monthly REX check-in call. I have a poem for us to start with by Kay Ryan, one of my favorite poems titled The Least Action, which is kind of a principle I try to work by that seldom works, but the principle of least action, of getting something done through least action. So here's what Kay Ryan has to say about least action. Is it vision or the lack that brings me back to the principle of least action, by which in one branch of rabbinical thought, the world might become the kingdom of peace, not through the tumult and destruction necessary for a new start, but by adjusting little parts a little bit, maybe turn that cup a quarter inch or scoot up that bench. It imagines an incremental resurrection, a radiant body puzzled out through tinkering with the fit of what's available, as though what is, is right already, but a skew. It is tempting for any person who would like to love what she can do. Isn't that nice? Let me read it again. This is like fun, Least Action by Kay Ryan. Is it vision or the lack that brings me back to the principle of least action, by which in one branch of rabbinical thought, the world might become the kingdom of peace, not through the tumult and destruction necessary for a new start, but by adjusting little parts a little bit, maybe turn that cup a quarter inch or scoot up that bench. It imagines an incremental resurrection, a radiant body puzzled out through tinkering with the fit of what's available, as though what is, is right already, but a skew. It is tempting for any person who would like to love what she can do. Well, so much for cynicism, Jerry. You know what? I had to puncture that. Good. Cynicism is cheap and it's easy. Which makes it so fun. Fun, but not exactly seductive. Cheap and easy sounds pretty seductive to me. Well, that's because you're an American. What are we gonna say? Okay, so here's the good news, everybody. Life expectancy rises in the United States for the first time in four years. I feel longer lived already. On another note. I think we just used up that extra time. How America's 1% came to dominate equity ownership. The wealthiest US households are strengthening their grip over corporate America. I thought this was optimistic news, Bo. I'm just trying to get the richest 1% of Americans now account for more than half of the value of equities owned by the US households, according to Goldman Sachs. And as one commenter put in this article from the FT, dear Americans, your only solution is to vote again for Mr. Trump. The good news is that now that he's proposing further cuts to welfare payments, fast track to neo feudalism with the king at the peak of the shining city upon the hill. Yours truly, the fellow surf. Hey, Jermaine, did you like that article? I sent you a couple. I hope I'm not sending you too many. Oh, no, please do keep sending them. I like looking at them. Thank you. I just finished reading a novel, kind of a sci-fi novel by Robert Harris called The Second Sleep. Anybody heard of it? And anybody heard of the concept of second sleep? Yes, in the middle, in the dark middle ages. Oh, yeah. That's right. You used to go to sleep kind of early, I guess when it got dark maybe, and then get up and wander around and maybe have a snack and talk and socialize and then go back and have a second sleep. You know, with my vast privilege, I've been thinking of just practicing that myself. Excellent. I think you could do that. If you practice it unintentionally. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But keep going, Jerry. It does sound to me like humans might, it sounds great, especially for wintertime, like the right thing for humans to do. Yeah. So does anybody intend to read it or can I spoil the plot a little bit for you? Spoil it. Jermaine, good? Spoil it. Spoil away. So the whole book is set in like 1468 and you're reading along and there's a guy on a horse going past a village and then a priest shows up in a village and then you're 15% into the book when you hit a priest who's collected a bunch of items among which is a shiny object that has on its back a little picture of an apple with a bite taken out of it. And it suddenly dawns on you, we're not in 1468 our time. It turns out we're in a renumbered 1468 because when the apocalypse hit and everybody had to, like basically the assumption is that our supply chains are so fragile and we are so dependent now on technology that when it breaks, it's going to break catastrophically and society will break down and everybody will leave the cities and then give it a thousand years and nature will reclaim most everything that we didn't destroy. And so, you know, there's no archeologists, there's no science. The Catholic church basically steps in and says, oh, good, we got this. So everybody becomes highly religious and the religion is busy trying to suppress the rediscovery of anything that ever happened before. And that's the basic framework of this novel which was pretty good. It was really interesting. But so the day of the great event of the great apocalypse, they started again at 666. That was the first year of the new era. And so 1468 or whatever it is, and one of the things that is that many years ahead of the disaster. And then it's an interesting conceit. It's also, it makes you think over and over and over again how thoroughly could one wipe out the present civilization so that it would be hard to find evidence of it? How long in the future do you need to be able to find evidence? Right. No, I mean, because some things are going to last for a long time but will eventually go away. Exactly. Hoover Dam. It's going to last a long time. Right. But some things go away much faster than you might expect. Exactly. So that's just... That's part of it. And things like glass last a really long time. Glass is very hardy, very durable. Iron will rust, but glass will not. In Portland, you can tell that two years of people not being here, the jungle will take it back. Just take it back. Yeah. Yep. Yeah, well, this is a question that, although if you guys know Nova Spivak. Yeah, I know him well. I think he'll know when he does, yes. That's one of the things he's trying to address in terms of leaving human knowledge way more than 10,000 years. I'm starting with Elon Musk's roadster that's circling the sun. Right, so in the trunk of the roadster is Nova's Ark, which is a device meant to be found by other civilizations to tell them who we were. Hey, how about the Philippines deciding that they're going to shift to the other power on the planet? How was that? Those, yeah, deterte, yeah, that's right. So what did he say? The Philippines decided, you know, America, no, we're gonna move closer to China. You need to, we're not gonna do any more military cooperation. Oh, interesting, I hadn't seen that. Yes, we're losing to the Pacific quickly. That's a big deal, yeah. And they did it just the right time, didn't they? Get close to China. And then what, even though that weirdo who's right now the head of the Philippines, his... Deterte. Yes, but his own minister, when he announced the policy, announced his simultaneous disagreement with it. Wow, that was shocking. His minister did? Yes, he was like, yes, we've decided to do this, but I don't agree with it. That's ballsy, because Deterte is not known for being a cozy, cuddly kind of guy. Well, I'm sure some drugs will be planted in that guy's house in no time. Yeah, yeah. So what is anybody doing that is like positively rex-y? Philosophy. Philosophy good? Philosophy good? What a great time of philosophy. Oh, I like that background. What's that? Nice. Well, I was inspired by David's. This is a, so if you go to Sao Paulo, Brazil, there is a part of the city known as Batman Alley, which is a center of graffiti art. And there is actually, there's a picture of Batman and Pele kissing, or painting of that really like classic 1966, Adam West Batman, that is at the entry of it. It was called Batman Alley originally because it was deemed to be a really dangerous place, like the place where Batman's parents were killed. And it's evolved into this massive open art exhibit, graffiti art exhibit. The piece behind me is called a Festival of Democracy. And you see all the people celebrating, they're celebrating the disinternment of the return of Hitler. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. But and notice, of course the star. Yeah. Oh my God. Yeah. Yeah, there was some really fantastic art there. It was actually, in many ways, the high point of my trip to Brazil last year or two years ago. Yeah, that's cool. Was it two years ago? Was there a memory? It was late 2018. You are on the call show. It was late 2018. And it was just before the vote. And you shared with us the audience vote. That is seared in my memory. Crazy stuff. On a milder murals graffiti note, if any of you are ever in Miami, go to this part of town called the Westwood Walls, which is spectacular, absolutely spectacular. And about 20 years ago, a wealthy art enthusiast basically bought a whole bunch of cheap warehouses in a very industrial warehousing part of Miami, and then invited some 30, 40 graffiti artists to come in and take every vertical surface and paint. And so you can stand in places where there's like the wall right in front of you inside a courtyard is painted, and then the wall across the street is painted, and then the building in the background is painted. And they're all different, and they paint over them often. So there's like rotation of the art. It's really remarkable. Cool. So Jerry, what are you up to lately, my friend? Not enough. So I'm trying to, I realized over the turn of the end of the year that in the world of trust, I think I have an important point of view but I haven't published a book yet, but I'm not unique. Like I can point to a dozen people who have really important things to say about trust. I can look around and there's like a bunch of people working on trust doing important things, including Pele kissing Batman. And then I thought like this brain thing I've got is in fact unique. Like I don't know anybody who has been curating a single mind map for 22 years, who can use it live improv style in front of an audience who, you know, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So I realized that probably I need to, the tip of my spear so to speak is probably conversations with context. And I'm not sure exactly how to explain it or what to say about it. And I'd love all of your thoughts on this about whether is this unique or not? Is it useful or not? How to make it more useful? What to call it? Any and all of those things. Because right now I have picturesbrain.com which I have not publicized much at all. I really haven't thrown my energy behind it but it's a website and the idea is there's a business model behind it. If you're willing to do this for free and I can publish the video on YouTube then it's open and it's free. If you'd like my time virtually then there's one price and if you want me in person it's more like a speech. So the price creation is pretty large. Let me pause because Jermaine is having a thought. Yes I am. So I can see a couple of ways that something from what you said that I heard which might not be what you actually said. The way that evolved in my head was a contextualized interview where you have a one-on-one interview with someone but you are doing in a second screen the brain explorations highlighting particular works or links but just over the course of the conversation and you'd probably edit the video afterwards so that it's not quite as interrupted but basically it's this contextualized conversation where you and the person you're interviewing are having a really good conversation but what you're showing is the fractal branching universe around what you're talking about. So that's one, another would be to take something like that and embed it with a particularly truncated version of Jerry's brain reference, just the references that you've called out in the conversation and have that be an actual purchasable product. Because if you're having a conversation with I don't know, Neil DeGrasse Tyson talking about astronomy there may be some very few out there who are really interested in seeing having not just a conversation but seeing all of the links and explorations that surround the halo, the halo of knowledge around that conversation. So anyway, just the idea of having that dual screen of a deep talk and then again, just filling in that halo, corona, which probably not a good word these days, but. I could see it could be viral. It's kind of making your personal knowledge garden visible in some sense. Yeah, yeah, and let me just echo back a little bit of this, which it's sort of like this is the last thing you said, Jimmy, it's kind of like a wet, a very. Whoops. Frozen. Or alive. Still frozen. No, no, you're back. Sorry. Yep. So the last thing you said was kind of like a very annotated webby bibliography of the conversation, right? Notes section, the references section. Well, I would even say it's more like not so much a bibliography as if you had a full list of Wikipedia links and what links to those links. So that, a body of information to follow that goes beyond just simply the surface level of the discussion. I was listening to Tyler Cowan has a interview he did at the end of the year talking about his interviews, kind of he had like his assistant interviewing him. And one of the things that they said was that they get more traffic to their transcripts than they do to the audio. That was interesting. And that may be unique to these wonky, you really want to be one. But it occurs to me that you're doing a version of a transcript that probably has more value, you know? It's interesting. And I receive a couple of things that come as video with transcript and I tend to not listen to the video, partly because video takes time. Video has fixed bandwidth. Right. And you can read faster, you can skip easily. It can be non-linear if necessary. Right. Audio and video. And I will watch the video if the video has a lot more information. But if it's just that person's talking head, much though I might like listening to their voice explain the thing. And I'm losing the content of the tone of their delivery, which often is really interesting. But I can go boom, boom, boom through the text way faster. And in the case of the one I read yesterday that's the thing in my head, she had embedded a whole bunch of useful links in the text, which were not on the screen or in her, in what she was saying. So it was actually more useful to read the text. You know, it would be really neat as if you could actually get to the links that are exposed in your brain. You know, not later, but transcript style, like right away. Yeah. Or at least somewhere. Well, when I'm in a Zoom conversation like this, what I'm often doing is I'm harvesting from the brain and dropping links into the chat, which makes them easily available. However, the Zoom recording doesn't synchronize with the chat and doesn't include the chat. So from the recording perspective, you're screwed. You still have a separate thing, right? Recording to the cloud does. What? You played with that? So I'm recording to the cloud right now. And if you look at, and you get two links, right? Yes, but they're separate. They're separate files. They're not synchronized. So I get the chat. Look at the one that's for sharing. Let me see if I can find one here. Yeah, I don't think I've seen this before. This might be a feature I've never seen. Yeah. David. I'll try. Yeah. David, press the point. Very interesting. Because that would be useful. And I think that one of the problems with the brain is that it works pretty well when I'm driving it. Meaning if I do a tour and talk about what I've put in my brain and then zoom, zoom, zoom, zoom, zoom, it's hard for me to leave that trail for anybody else. Meaning I can't hit a button on my brain that says, start recording now. And then at the end of two minutes of talking, just takes whatever I touched and sends that to everybody as a bunch of links, as a journey, as a trip tick or a playlist. That doesn't exist. It's a feature I've been asking for forever. Doesn't exist. So then if I just send one thing I have done, I attended an event recently where I have one thought for the event and then as things got mentioned and as speakers came up and blah, blah, blah, blah, it's all connected to that one thought for the event. So under the thought for the event are people I met at the event and above it are topics and books mentioned and quotes mentioned and including a Peggy Lee song that was mentioned in passing that I went and found and linked up and there it is. And so it's all convenient because it's all connected to one thought but it's not in temporal order and you'd have to sort of then start fishing around to figure out where to go. That make sense? I mean, I can show you guys what that is. How are any of you familiar with TVTropes.com? Possibly. Oh, oh, oh, you need to. So TVTropes is the stickiest spider web online. So I have fortunately, mercifully, forgotten about it entirely until you mentioned it right now because I can tell that I'm about to be sucked back into it because of what you just said. Yeah, it is, it, no, sorry, he's getting a spam call here. Okay. But every page links to dozens of other pages so you can compare the trope of, oh, you know, the heel turn versus the face turn, you know, and listen, okay, and here's what we see in comic books and here's movies, hidden TV, in written fiction, you know, in real life sometimes. Right. And just that, you know, what can possibly go wrong? Yeah, exactly. That's a perfect example of it, which is a version of the trope that you're saying that nothing could go wrong and you say that just before something goes wrong. Right. So anyway, what you're talking about in that kind of three-dimensional knowledge space, non-linear, non-temporal knowledge space has immediately reminded me of wandering through TV tropes. Yep, yep, thank you. And I'm gonna go back and look into it again because I remember loving it as you can tell from my brain. So here's the event, here's how I annotated the event that I was just telling you about. And it was a meeting of the Genius Network that happened in January, 2020. And so here are people that I met at the event, but up here, for instance, somebody early in the whole process said that hairdressers can see divorces two years before they happen. Okay. Right, which is interesting. So I put it under hairdressers and divorce and I just put that in the brain as a statement. And I don't have a study that backs it or anything like that, but to me it was like a, that sort of makes some kind of intuitive sense. Borderline personality disorder is here. Being an occult is exactly like a relationship with a narcissist, because one of the people who was interviewed at this event was Romani Dervasala, who studies as a psychologist studying narcissism. She's at Cal State, Los Angeles. And there was this very interesting conversation about sort of the narcissistic aspect of entrepreneurship. I bet he has a lot to say about politics right now. It's a woman and she was pretty good. We didn't go that deep into the political side of it, but yeah, for sure. I mean, the question is, you know, is Trump a narcissist, et cetera, et cetera. So I'm just showing this because I sent the organizers a link to this thought after the event. I also recorded myself for three or four minutes doing a brief recap of the event. So basically from this thought, going up and down a little bit to show some of the different things that we had talked about. Oh, and by the way, there's a scroll bar up here. What you're seeing up here is half of what I got, is here's more and here's more. Right? So there was a whole bunch of interesting stuff going on. In fact, one of my favorite things, let's see if it collides up here, this is wisdom that I'm like really working with. If you're trying to create a great tagline, use the format verb your noun, find your fight, fund your dreams, play your feelings, decode your future, enhance your decisions, verb your noun. Shut your mouth. Shut your mouth, shut your pie hole. It is a really great succinct way to do a tagline. Anyway, so yeah, so yeah, so partly I've been doing Inside Jury's brain calls, which are too long. They're like 90 minute calls and they result in little riffs that I have not had the time to go back in and edit out that I could use as call outs or as teases or as publicity or as examples or whatever. There's a riff on the potato that I do in one of the calls. And Pete Kaminsky was on some of those early calls and he was like, when you riff on stuff in the brain, that really works. The problem is that when people go in on their own unless they're patient and explore, they're not gonna necessarily figure out what, where, when. I have little to say about how the brain does what it does. I have no, you know, I have no influence on its design. And I don't have, you know, the thing I'd love to, the thing I'm tempted to do and haven't done is to start, I own the domain openglobalmind.com. And that is my holding pen intellectually for what I wish would replace the brain. It would be a distributed, collaborative, open platform that would allow us to do brain-like things together so that we could peek into Jermay's brain and Dave's brain. I know, isn't that scary? It is a little frightening. But then we could juxtapose our brains and do idea, you know, basically have idea sex. And that would be. That's probably the domain name you need. The idea sex is actually, I never thought about that, but I need to buy it now. You know, Dave, you're totally on this and I'm gonna see if anybody's taken idea sex yet. Cognitive intercourse. You know what? Cognitive intercourse. Cognitive intercourse. Oh, that's the highfalutin. That's the upscale one. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. That's the highfalutin domain name. Brain fucking. The low rent one? Okay. Yeah, it's a low rent. Yeah, I wanted to make sure I got both extremes. Ideasex.com is gone.net, it's gone.org is available. Ideasex.us, or us, is available. So is Ideasex.group. Actually, that's a pretty good one. It's probably Ideasex.sex. Idea.sex. Idea.sex, there you go. Oh, wow. Okay, let's try that. Idea.sex. Google Domains doesn't support the .sex ending. So I'd have to go to a different domain registrar. Terrible. Good for them. Good for them for having small boundaries. So, you know, in terms of the brain type map, I think part of what you may need is something like an infographic for any given moment. Because, you know, the brain, it's a little abstract. You just get the top level headings, essentially. And you don't really get a strong idea of what those relationships are. Yeah. And, let's see, there's a name for that. Sounds like... Kelvie Bird does that. She works with Otterstammer. Yep, I just attended a webinar that they ran about Kelvie's work, which was interesting, and not as insightful as I had hoped. I was, I don't know, it was interesting, but, you know... She calls it scribing. Some kind of scribing. You froze again, Jerry. Did I freeze? Sorry. Have you guys heard my idea for story threaders? No? Story shutters? Story threaders. Oh, threaders. Yeah, and of course I own the domain and there's a fledgling, fledgling website up. There's almost nothing on it. So, I've been using the brain for 22 years. I've attended zillions of meetings with graphic facilitators, you know, Anthony Weeks, Kelvie Bird, Jamey and I have met, Dave, everybody who's attended these meetings, we've met dozens of really talented facilitators, and because of all my work with the brain, I'm always frustrated watching them because when they write income inequality in pastel or in marker on their piece of paper, which they're later going to take a picture of and send me a PDF or a JPEG, I'm sitting here thinking, shit, they could actually connect to the idea of income inequality and you could go dig and any paper that was mentioned, you know, what I was just doing from the Genius Network meeting, you could do in a visual, that would be a much, much more interesting annotation of the meeting. So, Open Global Mind is a project idea to go pursue that and to say, what would a thing that replaces the brain that can be more visual? What would it look like? How would it work? How do we build that? That's sort of ambitious. I don't have that put together at this point. The other idea is, let's invite a whole bunch of creative people into the meeting. So, Story Threader is a new role. It would be like a super graphic facilitator, and it wouldn't be like a graphic facilitator, meaning the role of a Story Threader is not to record as best they can everything that was said in the meeting. The role of a Story Threader is to be involved in the meeting, listening for nuggets, shiny nuggets of wisdom that appeal to them, and then just to thread a story through those shiny nuggets. Because what I see often happen, and I think you may have heard me say this before, you go into a meeting, at the beginning of the meeting, there's like, wow, I love the people that are in this room. And then, wow, I love the ideas that they just wrote down on a post-it and introduced in 30 seconds as we went around brainstorming. And then, oh shit, what happened? Because the moment all these things get put on a board and clustered and somebody puts a big noun over it and somebody tries to report back, that synthesizing motion destroys most of the really interesting little sparks that were in the room at the beginning. I've never, I've seldom seen the interesting sparks survive that process. So to me, that process always kills good ideas. And the Story Threader role is meant to be a minority report in the room to blow some oxygen and put some kindling on those sparks and allow those sparks to, in any way the Story Threader wants to. Oh shit, I froze. Just for a second, okay. So the idea is that Story Threaders have license to represent the things they liked in the meeting and maybe interview a couple of people a little more, whatever and then manifest them as a short story, a super game, a deck of cards, an interview series of mini-documentary, graphic cartoon, I don't care. Their job is just to channel and then produce the best manifestation of some piece of what they cared about from that meeting. And they have a little budget to do this. They have a couple of weeks to do it afterward. So they attend the meeting. They're allowed to, you know, they're allowed to participate and provoke people and respond or, you know, ask people for more info. And then two weeks later, they have to report it on. You know what, Jerry? It's interesting. They might get more funding to go finish. Right? Oops. Sorry, did I freeze again? Yeah, a little bit, yeah. I think that's on a computer or something. So I think my computer's not so happy these days. So that would be some temporalities to maintain the feeling of the dynamics. You know, is that something happens, something else happens rather than a static, because, you know, usually with the graphic recording, you get a static picture at the end. So as you say, lose the whole thing. You know, I was always disappointed that Apple didn't do more with QuickTime because to me, I always thought that was, that's what it was supposed to be about. Yeah. I was always, I was disappointed in a similar way. I was disappointed with Adobe and with the open document format way back when, because when Adobe came out with PostScript, I was like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. You guys are brilliant. You guys should invent the open document format that everybody starts to use that deepens what the web and all these other things can do. Yeah, but how do we make money off of that? Exactly, exactly. And so they went for protecting, putting a shell over the surface and letting people protect their IP, which was the opposite of what I hoped and wished that they would have done. So therefore we have the saying these days, PDF is where information goes to die. Good one too. I remember Doc Searles being pretty angry about PDF too. Yeah. So between pictures, brain and story threaders and open global mind and all this kind of stuff, I think there's a there there. I'm just not sure what it is. We're gonna start with it, what to push on, what to do. So my instinct right now is to just try to publicize pictures brain and get that rolling a little bit and then see where it can go. If I could gather a small posse and go raise some sort of funding to do a four benefit version of open global mind and then as part of open global mind be doing pictures brain, be doing a bunch of these other things on the side because story threaders would feed open global mind because they would use the platform eventually, et cetera, et cetera. I think all these things kind of flow together as sub projects of a larger umbrella project but I don't know how to get from here to there. Okay. So one thing you could consider doing it that would be a for money version would be bespoke interviews with founders, organization leaders, thought leaders, people who are particularly, I have particular value to a particular organization and basically you are providing not just an interview to where you can learn what they're thinking about but giving all of this incredible context and links. So maybe it's just before the founding leader retires or you're gonna switch Bill Gates over for, you know, what's his name? Who's leading Microsoft now? You also have a conversation about Microsoft in this particular case with Microsoft with Bill Gates that can be then drawn upon by the organization. Does that make sense? Does that sound like something people would pay for? It makes great. As I said, I read this article on MIT Press, the final interview with Clayton Christensen. Man, it would have been hard to have what Jim A. just said for that. It would have been hard. Because I was in fact going off and going, oh yeah, let's go back to the innovator's dilemma. Immediately I was doing that on my own, you know? Yeah, yeah. And partly, so I can see doing that, I can see having an interview and annotating the hell out of it and taking what they say and putting it in the brain and doing a report afterward that then gets edited back into the interview and then making the brain available for all of those things. That seems to me totally doable. I tend to have a critical look on whatever I'm busy interviewing. So if it was Clayton Christensen, I'd be like, dude, you forgot to talk about defensive innovation, because I have a whole riff I've done in the past that a lot of corporations are basically engaged in defensive innovation to put off the innovators. And they're very successful. And so I'd be critical of the person I'm interviewing. If I got to interview Bill Gates, woo-hoo. You know, I'd have a lot of things to say that Bill may not want to hear. And I could choose to not go there. I could be like, I could sort of make the hagiographic version of a brain interview. Or I could do a critical interview, which I think is more interesting, but may not be what anybody is willing to pay for. It depends on the organization. Depends on what critical means. If the person's gonna leave the interview feeling insulted, which I don't think that's what you'd be doing, but some people are very sensitive, then that might be a problem. If the person's gonna leave the interview feeling like they just talked about what you wanted to talk about, not what they felt like that needed to be said. That would be a problem. So you need to, you're gonna have to be judicious with your critical nature. Sensitive to what the larger story needs to be. You know, you're crafting a narrative. You need to have a strong narrative, especially if you're using all of the green stuff to show this big context. You need to make it really clear what the path of this is. And so whether you're doing the brain in real time, and that may actually be for some people, a great utility to have your brain searches happening in real time during the conversation so that they can pay off of them too. So if you and I did an interview, I'd definitely want you to do that because it'd be a nuclear reaction. I don't know if you remember those old school film strips where somebody would throw a ping-pong ball into a room that's filled with mouse traps with ping-pong balls all the time, demonstrating what a nuclear reaction looks like. That's what it would be for some people. For other people, it'd be really distracting and problematic. So that would be up to you in how you set it up. But there's a lot that could be done there. And critical is not bad insulting us. Yeah, exactly. So, and I understand that the Los Alamos project made a lot more progress once they dropped all the mouse traps. That would be, that would make sense. How do you fit so many mouse traps in just one single bomb? It was really hard. And then gravity was making some of the mouse traps operate faster than others. So it really fucked up the whole thing. But I put in the chat, XO advisor and disruptor role. So two years ago in 2018, I was doing a bunch of work with the exponential organizations folks. And through that, I did a bunch of disruption speeches, but I also was an advisor to a bunch of initiatives. And these were teams of, I don't know, six people, five people who were seconded by their company into projects to do innovation. And I would show up and listen quickly to their pitch, usually like a five minute pitch and then offer feedback. And I was offering feedback a lot with my brain. That worked really, really, really well because it was extremely compact. But then at the end of the conversation, I could send them links to a whole bunch of stuff they'd never heard of. And I could give them a quick tour of, oh, by the way, your, what you're trying to do cuts into this category and this category and this category. And here's who tried to do that in the past. Go look around, you know, and I'm happy to help you with that later. But the live-action braining with people, I like maybe most more than anything. So a good conversation is fabulous with the brain. Live-action with a group that's on a mission is even better. So I think one of my propositions here is that I can improve your groups thinking and decision-making capacity and context in a way that's gonna make a big difference to their project. And I think that's of high value. I just, I'm not sure how to sell it. And you're not, yeah, you're not selling the brain. You're selling your advice for you. Exactly. We're just trying to figure out where the, you know, I mean, at one level, you're arguing, you know, ideas have value. Right. Kind of skeptical about. And then another is that relationships between ideas have value. Maybe more. Yeah. The references to things that involve ideas have value. It's like, I guess something, you know, but, you know, it's hard to, you know, I think maybe I was trying to think, figure out who would, you know, what's the, since we're doing Christiansen, what job does this do for people? Right. And, you know, I was like, actually the one that I think might be most likely is the, you know, legacy interviews for people who are gonna die. And, you know, like their family buys a book at Christmas of Jerry summarizing this guy's intellectual life, you know, and it's the book that they want, kind of. But you'd have to have, the brain would have to be able to do a variety of kind of output formats. Yeah, yeah. And, and also, I mean, it's just, this is a, there's a couple of side notes from what you were just saying, but one of them is the open global mind infrastructure I would like to have would also replace things like Scrivener. So I've got Scrivener, which is a bookwriting app open on my iPad, because I'm trying to sort of generate a book, but Scrivener is very frustrating because when you have a nugget someplace in one of the things you think you're writing, it's really hard to move it into another, another document. It's just like the boundaries around each document are pretty hard. And for me, I want to have a whole bunch of nuggets in the landscape. And I want the book to be a playlist. Pros up, Jerry. 24. And then assembles them into a book. And, Lost you a playlist. Yeah, sorry. We lost you a playlist. Yep. So I want a book to basically be a playlist that then picks up nuggets in the order of your playlist and publishes those out as a book that then makes it really easy to reuse some of the nuggets. You can duplicate it and modify it so that it fits in the next stream or whatever. But the apps as designed basically contain the nuggets inside of each book as you started it, which is, to me, not that helpful. So one of the uses of Open Global Mind would be as an authoring tool for the kinds of outputs you're describing, Dave. And I'm alive. I mean, go ahead, Jermaine. No, it's saying that the talking, I was initially kind of hesitant about the idea of it being related to families. But then it struck me that having a repository of your elder's wisdom, an interactive repository of your elder's wisdom would really big in China. Oh. Oh, that's interesting. There's a market. Yeah. How's your Chinese drink? Oh, it's bad. It's not a good drink. Do you realize the compromises Jerry would have to make in China? Yeah, yeah. Just check your soul at the door, my friend. Chinese expats in Canada and the US. They'd never be... Once they were in my brain, they'd never be able to return to the mainland. Basically, there's a thought in my brain called she is creating a surveillance state. And that's under a whole bunch of other stuff. And it's like that, you know what? That's never gonna make it past the border. Did you guys follow the story about how the CIA owned the biggest encryption company? Yeah, it's been like 10, 15 years since it was doing this. So, you know, but yeah, that was... And I'm sure nothing like that is happening now. No, no, no. That would be difficult, bandora unethical. The CIA wishes they were Hawaii, right? They wishes they were, right? And I'm sure the CIA and NSA run most of the VPN companies. What better way to track everything? So, and Jamey, in particular, because you and I have done a lot of talking and thinking together at IFTF and here and other places, could you see using any kind of tool? So for me, open global mind should be one step more difficult than Instagram or Tumblr. And that's about it. It should not be like the brain, which is like, whoa, wait a minute, it should be, you know, pretty simple and pretty intuitive. And then should be usable in this kind of a conversation, pretty easily findable, shareable, showable, usable. Could you see doing a conversation with me, for example, in a tool like that? Yes, I'm just trying to think about what it would look like in the midst of the conversation. Mm-hmm. Because one of the drawbacks of doing live brain conversations is that sometimes you seem distracted. Or if I'm, if you and I are talking, we're getting to, I'm driving towards a particular point, but you click on a word and then go off having your chain reaction, that word, that's not what I was trying to go. It's distracting. It's distracting. And so that could be a problem. So it has to be something that would be non-invasive. Yeah. Or optionally attention grabbing. Right. So one way for example, imagine that right now I have it set up so that I'm looking at you all in gallery view and on the right is the chat. Imagine that there was also a series of tiles of things that were Instagrammy or Pinteresty that were sort of flowing past us as well that were nuggets from this mind map from a context. And that if you wanted to, you could click on one of those and it would take over most of the screen, would take the pictures of us and make those thumbnails and show you that one node in context with the larger nodes. That's weird. You just went out of focus tremendously. I think that was the whole system barfing on whatever you were about to say. Or whatever you were saying. It wasn't my image that went fuzzy. No, but anyway, this is a second screen app. Because you don't want to remove the focus from the conversation. You wanted to have it up on your iPad next to you or on your, a second screen hooked up to your computer or whatever. How many people do that? A lot of people and actually there's a lot of studies around second screening during television. A lot of people like a significant portion of people in the U.S. have a second screen up, whether it's a phone or a pad or whatever whilst watching television. And so there are people who are accustomed to the idea. And if you do it, you just have to phone. Gamers, God, yeah, yeah. Discord. Yeah, exactly. That's actually a perfect example of the people have the Discord running. Janice, when she watches TV, has her pad open to a Kitten Academy Discord. Because it's an ongoing, it's basically where kittens learn to be cats. It's this place in the East Coast that basically does fostering but has streaming videos on anyway. But the point is that people are really accustomed to that. And I don't think it would feel unnatural that you don't lose the focus of the conversation. You don't feel like people are being shoved into the corner. What you're doing is actually on the second screen pops up the links, the web, whatever is the visualization. But also not directly related to that but just something else that ping-ponged out. Snapchat streaks. There's this whole mechanism in Snapchat that signifies, that basically flags that where you've had an ongoing continuation of a continued conversation in Snapchat over the course of the days. And people actually compete to have the longest streaks with someone. So basically with this kind of system, in an open mind system, you wanna make it, you wanna see rewards for ongoing interaction with ongoing contributions to it. So I'm having an idea streak, whatever is the language that gets used. Basically, there's something that becomes fun about doing it. Cause one of the things I know that's always kept me from getting deep into the brain technology is the key DM of feeling like I have to enter in all this stuff from other sources and what's going on in my head. And I just don't have the energy to do that. Don't have the focus to do that. But if we gamified to use terrible language. Yeah. You know, I think one issue is that we use sound for most of our communication this way. And other media are much less fluid. I mean, ultimately what you wanna do is kind of use DMT machine elves, 3D visual language, which is dynamic and actually speaks, it's expressive. And but you wanna go from, you know what I mean? I'm talking now, you've been talking, it's all sound. And then there are these static, even the brain, it's like one image at a time, but it's not actually itself moving. It's not actually doing the conversation itself. Right. So that's one way of looking at going from here to there. It's not listening. Can you explain a little bit more? I need the brain to listen. Yeah, can you explain, can you describe a little bit more the interaction you're envisioning? Well, it's, you don't wanna just give static pictures of moments in time. You wanna have, well, the movie is a bunch of static pictures, but it creates the illusion of being dynamic. So I think that's kind of what you want. Yeah. And I think the brain still is, yeah, I go here and here's all the nodes reading out and I go there. But it's not actually, it's not a conversation. And I suppose, again, this is the stops versus flows sort of thing, because the brain is one way of doing stocks. You know, here's all the relationships and you can navigate this immense field of relationships. But you don't actually communicate the navigation. And you do that yourself or then you show a little image. And I suppose in your day to day research work, you do do the navigation, kind of like a slower pace. Yeah, what works well when I do riffs using the brain is that I'm showing the brain, which is static. Every time I click, it rotates to a new location and then it's static, there's nothing going on. But my voiceover is basically telling a story while I do that. What I don't do enough for lack of time mostly is click on the links, go to the webpage and show you what I just meant and why I linked that there. I don't do that very often when I'm doing a riff in the brain because it's also distracting to be flipping back and forth between context that loses people. But the context, the thing itself is right there. It's right at hand, right? From the links that are embedded in the brain. And then what I don't have or don't do very much is like special effects where something would zoom in or zoom out or take more attention, less attention, something like that. But the narrative that I'm offering is actually key to the value of those riffs. Sort of to what you're saying Mark. Yeah. I suppose it was against kind of static images. Hypercard again, comes to mind. I loved Hypercard. Hypercard was my PIM for a couple of years. Speaking of Apple technologies, that was wonderful, they got abandoned. Yeah, and Atkinson had to blackmail Apple into shipping it with the Mac and then Apple eventually just abandoned it and it's hard to find now in any form or shape at all. It's weird. And Hypercard could have been the web. Yeah. If you added URLs to Hypercard, Hypercard could have been HTML and scripting and a bunch of other stuff. It needed to understand URLs. I'm pretty sure Tim Berners-Lee talked about Hypercard as being an inspiration for first iteration of the web. Yeah. But if Gase had understood what the hell he was sitting on, no, Nick. Yeah. Anyway, any other thoughts on which way to pursue this, including completely different riffs on it? I'm gonna put a name, which you may already know. Let's see, how do I do this? In the chat. I'm using my iPad. Yeah, yeah, I figure you're on a different interface than you. Where did all the buttons go? Whoops. There's Geary Lagos. Do you know that name? LAGOS? Yeah, he does trail marks. And I think it seems very, I think he's one of the people that's working with Jack Park and with Mark Antoine on kind of related things. But I think the trail marks notion, I think may, I think he's on a much kind of deeper technology level. Yeah. So, you know, it's like the back room researchers on that. And it's really hard to get products out of that that are highly usable. Cool. I did not know him. I think he's in London. One other thing that came to mind, especially while Mark was speaking, was voice recognition has gotten really good. I mean, to the point where people have, can regularly use Alexa and crap like that, where I can regularly create text messages by speaking to my phone. And it's 99% accurate. Would it, you know, what would it look like to have a your second screen app that was listening for keywords? So you just unlocked a piece of open global mind that I've been thinking about, but haven't spent enough attention on is, and I've thought this about the brain for a long time. So the brain supports thought types, link types, a whole bunch of metadata that I do not use. And I do not use it because it's time consuming. Because if I had to take three times as long to put a book in my brain as I do now, I would stop using it as much. If there was an AI listener app that occasionally piped up and said, hey Jerry, looks like you just put a book in. Do you mind if I tag it up? I'd be like, go, like, of course, go. And if this app also then said, given what you usually do with books and authors, I've taken the liberty of setting all that up for you. All you have to do is say, yep, yep, yep, yep, yep. And nope, nope, nope. I would be all over that because the time it takes me to go hunt down the five books that somebody just wrote, tidying them up, cleaning them up, put them in the right place and all that, that's pretty time consuming. It helps me remember the person and their books, but it's just time consuming. If that could be automated away, that'd be great. And we've got Google Home and Alexa at home for better or worse. And if Trump gets a second term, I might have to emigrate because these systems are gonna know everything about us. However, I've grown very accustomed to asking for things and saying things to the system, to the wall, to the cloud, to the whatever. So the idea of using something brain-like and offering it commands, you know, computer, T, O, gray, hot is really appealing. And so I think that with a nice API and some mode of experimenting where we invite people into play in OGM and say, hey, here's what some of the possibilities are. I think other people would come up with even cleverer ideas. So what I was talking about is slightly different from that. It's actually more imagining what if your brain or whatever this OGM system can function akin to a graphic facilitator. So listening to what's being said and on the second screen, popping up, quietly popping up links, popping up connections, making connections that aren't going to be intruding on you saying, you know, getting in your face but are available or something that and being recorded so that you can, it can basically serve as not just an archive of what's said but an archive of the ideas that are expressed. Yeah. So when you mentioned, when you said, hey, you know, like that video of a ping pong ball and the mousetraps, it would do the search you just did. And it would say, hey, just found three of those. Would you, which one would you like? And then that could get included in the trail of the conversation. Yep. Yeah, exactly. And as you said, multi-party speech recognition is getting better and better and better and better and cheaper and cheaper. The only thing that's missing is good speaker recognition. Yeah. So right now, if something was recording this conversation, it would just be a long string of work. Actually, it can tell with a little bit of metadata, it knows exactly which stream each voice came from. So it doesn't need to distinguish them from the conversation. True. And there's Susan. Yay. Glad you're here. You've gone deep down a rabbit hole of my brain and what I should do with my brain, and I don't mean the wet one on board, which has been totally fun. And just to catch you up a little bit, I have a dream project I call Open Global Mind. And a couple of years ago, I applied to the Shuttleworth Foundation for a Shuttleworth Fellowship to fund me to go build Open Global Mind, but they didn't bite. And they don't give you any feedback about why not. Very likely it was because I'm not a coder, and I have no code and no posse. It's just an idea. But the idea being how to build out something, and you're muted right now so we don't hear you. But the idea being to create something different from better than the brain that was open, collaborative, and easier that would allow us to have these enhanced conversations. And then behind that was my question about how I'm trying to use. I've kind of discovered, maybe this is like an obvious aha, that my use of the brain is unique, where my ideas about trust are not unique. I can point to a dozen other people who have really good ideas on trust. But my work with the brain is unique. And I adore, I love being in conversations where I get to use the brain to improve the conversation. I wish that other people could participate with their brain equivalence in the same way. And we could do idea sex in the middle of the conversation. That would be really exciting to me. I'm eager for that, but I've met a few other people. There's a couple other brain users and a couple other people in other tools who've got some capacity for some of that, right? So that's kind of the context. And we're trying to figure out who would pay for this? How would this be manifest? What would the conversation be like? What does the interface do? How does AI fit? And speech recognition, which is where Mark just took us, because a lot of the value here is just in our voices along the way. And speech record was getting good enough that it can pick up, oh, Jerry just mentioned whatever. Open goal of mind. I'm going to put the website link at arm's reach right here. And I'm really interested also because you've spent so much time observing people work together in virtual spaces, how this changes that. Because I remember years ago, I was at David Eisenberg's Freedom to Connect conference. And some guy was about to demo a three-dimensional space as a collaborative space. And I had to go out of the room to get a call. But on the group chat, I said, oh, this is going to be fun. And I predicted, and this is what happened, at the beginning of the whole thing, the guy had to take his avatar, walk over to a board in a room, and then set up something awkwardly on the board that was not very easy to see. And the whole thing was an obstruction more than any kind of benefit to the collaboration. It just was not useful in the collaboration. And I would love instead to have things that amplify our ability to think, the do, connect, envision, remember, all those kinds of things. I'm thinking, well, I will not tell you the two conversations that I've had. So I'm very deeply influenced by the two conversations I've already had this morning. Wow, okay. So I'm not going to go into that, but it's kind of amazing because it made me, this is a lateral move. And one of the ideas that I came back to was the notion of there's a Japanese term called ba. And I once had to give a talk on communities of practice and ba and how they were the same and different. Well, that stretched my mind. I never quite figured it out. Anyway, ba is a, and you could, I use it now a little bit metaphorically, but it actually means a physical place like a, I think they're coming to take you away. Whoever that is, is a physical place like a doorway. Okay? Yep. Where people interact. Yes. And places of interaction, all right, are kind of bringing this service logic perspective in and saying, since we believe in that framework that, no, ba, a place where meaning is constructed. Right. Susan, are you seeing the screen sharing I'm doing? Yeah, that's what I'm responding to. Yep. So, yeah, Kitara Nishita, that whole thing is that it's in those interactions that value was created. And so spotting those or making places for that to happen is kind of what I think you're talking about. Yes. And that's, and given my other conversation this morning, which was about seed, which has a blockchain and tokens and all the rest of this stuff, is that, I'm not going to go into all of that, but I'm not going to go into all of that. I'm not going to go into all of that. I'm not going to go into all of that. And what I think I'm going to do with this stuff is that one could be imagined signaling the value, signaling that value has been created, even if it can't be made explicit in the moment. Signaling how? I mean, you, I could have a stack of tokens. You could have a stack of tokens. So some sort of feedback we could have. We give them to each other, we give them to each other. Right. The signal, you know, that was a great idea. and this is the like button yeah it's a it's a signal right yeah it's a signal and you don't the problem is that we try to make everything explicit and I think that it was started to tag conversations you know by having some an element of that of value that we that was a five token idea Jerry yeah and we give Jerry five tokens it's really interesting because I'm I'm totally torn on that idea for the following reason when I see voting and I offered a critique earlier of most meetings I've been to where the beginning the meeting is hot the people in the room are awesome the little ideas that get put into the room as they introduce themselves are sparkly and there's you can see little sparks of flame and then the group process that collects clusters the ideas and tries to generalize them usually kills off all the good ideas and one of the problems there is dot voting everybody gets so many dots to vote on the different ideas that kills everything as well and democratic ways in online forums of voting or giving tokens or whatever like when the Omidyar network opened up after everybody's name was a parentheses with a number in it which was how many people had voted on your I had given you like plus signs on the platform I just never went back in because I didn't want my name to be followed by a parentheses with a number rating right on the other on the other hand making slightly visible or explicit feedback and positivity is a terrific thing so I love it and I earlier explained the notion I have called story threaders which is a new role that would be like graphic facilitation but more flexible more interesting and the part of the mission for story threaders is to be minority reporters in the room minority reporters say more about that given meeting will not be voted that will not win the democratic vote the best ideas are outsider ideas that are a little too taboo to actually win any kind of democratic vote but those are the ones that usually I'm like wow okay that that was really cool it's a little contrarian it's a little dangerous yeah right okay so we could call them we could call them rexies okay I like the rexie currency you know uh and and uh I mean here's the here's the danger that you just pointed to I think is if you go back to Kahneman's system one and system two thinking yeah and if you the question is and the problem is of course that our neurology is such that I mean we we now understand that it might be like this but our neurology actually is so responsive we can't stop that having that response we don't you know we can't stop having it but we can have a different reaction to it right which is the old that's sort of jumping up to system two yeah what we're talking about with the the the omini art network thing is that all you were getting was uh system one dots right okay well maybe and maybe not maybe some of those were very thoughtful but um yeah so one of the things I love about using the brain is that it forces me into system two yeah as I remember things whenever I decide I'm seeing something worth remembering I then have to engage the gears and go what is it like where does it go what do I call it what is it connected to and all of that helps me remember the thing it's like note-taking only I'm using this brain software right so that's great and then my belief is that a conversation with other people with a brain-like thing at hand will help bump us into system two conversations well but you and it does when you use it it does I think prompt us to do yeah so but your point about it's being you know you're the only one that I still don't know how you how how you manage to do it while we're talking but it's just probably years of practice it's funny um years ago I coached one of the ift efforts on how to do a podcast and I was doing the yi ten calls back then I did them for nine years and I was doing a summary I was taking notes during the call and at the end I would do a readout of what we had said and at the end and and she she shut down the podcast a little bit early and then we debriefed afterward and she said you know you know Jerry um toward the end of the call I was kind of running out of things to ask and then I looked down at my notes and I hadn't written down a thing and it was only at that moment that I realized that maybe running a podcast interviewing the the guests keeping notes tracking the chat etc etc was maybe a superpower yeah so so it took me a while to realize that that was a bit of a skill yeah it is acquired very cost but I would like to figure out what is the what is the set of tools that are slightly more difficult just a millimeter more difficult than instagram which appears to be insanely popular in snapchat right the things that everybody's doing yeah how do we add this much more complexity to those tools so that we can have these rich conversations because we're at a moment where the political powers that beat her that are swinging us to the far right are creating a fear and fact free environment and both of those things yeah fear and the doubt of about facts and trust basically undermine system two thinking there is this is this is a concerted attack on system two it is considered discourse right it's i call it hijacking the amygdala it's limbic hijacking amygdala hijacking exactly yeah um and and it has proven to be a very successful political strategy yes um and so one of my beliefs is that open global mind can counteract that can be an antidote for that because then we can say oh but last month we agreed to this this and this so you know for example if the press had a system like open open global mind at the beginning of the 2016 campaign they might have said okay we're going to agree that the next time trump says any one of these six things which we have all agreed are nonsense bullshit lies we're going to shut off the cameras and leave the room in unison okay so it's like it's like you know bingo during a speech when you know any i don't know what that is um it's like bingo during a speech where anytime somebody says something you have to have to take a shot but here you agree that when he repeats this thing because you need animal conditioning methods they basically train trump to stop repeating the lies for example so that's sort of the that's sort of the uh before you hang on to the example yeah it's it's the it's the uh whatever you call it the contrary to the uh the the the rexie it's removing a rexie yes it's basically removing attention as a penalty for doing things that we agreed the problem is we have no history we have no context we're not we're not tracking over time everything is brand new right so whatever something what if we do this what if we uh i'm just i'm really just brainstorming here what if we had the ability to tag a conversation um exposed to during or what because because nobody's it's in the heat of battle that you need it exactly the point is so let's say let's say that we've had a conversation and we'd all agreed that this is you know a whatever a lie and we are going to um you know do something about taking taking away attention at that point yes um somebody could okay so the question is tracking tracking the insights as we get them tracking the uh and tracking the um attention uh well anti-rexers uh well you know what i mean that's not a good term but suppose we had conversations and as we were listening all we had to do was hit a key right okay so it's and i i hit keys i hit my my star key you know whenever i hear something that i think is really good uh and it's also tied to uh it's also tied to to um the conversation so that you can go back to it we did something called the um at ibm we built a 3d world which which was awkward in all the ways that you said right oh good but we had something called it was the only thing i ever got a patent for the rehearsal reviewer okay huh so that you had a conversation are you enacted in this in this in this space and it was about negotiations okay so you're practicing negotiation and you could mark those things and what what you did was after the thing was over you marked it but when you marked it you had you went back in you you went back and you could touch on it and it would replay what you had done or said at that point okay and you could then you could then assess your negotiation tactics and evaluate them that's great like like after action review yeah with with an annotatable record that's brilliant that was what that was yeah yep so and i think i think these rules are letting us rehearse and and sort of imagine and rehearse a lot of things that that happen in the world so it's a that's useful so i go ahead i'm just i'm just wondering whether there's an a real-time annotation tool to conversation that we're having now so and i think you stepped in after we were talking about this but mark had raised how good speech recognition is and we could easily have an agent listening to the conversation that raises and puts into some kind of a chat there could be a bot in our chat that basically says hey someone just mentioned susan's patent here's a link to the patent right right that's that's doable that's doable with today's technology i suppose with a base a known person like trump if you had like trump's personal brain like your personal brain yeah then and speech recognition then you could go right to that concept of that topic and then also have the all the evaluation on us yeah kind of real time yeah cool and i mean the thing i haven't been able to envision yet but i i i sort of i've imagined this but i haven't envisioned it is what what happens in a conversation when i show up with somebody like trump and we both have a brain-like representation of what we think and why we think it idea sex how how does that idea sex look it is it it well it is we get high on this stuff you know totally totally what what does that look like and how is it different and would somebody like trump be willing to put to represent how he thinks about these things because my understanding of his reasoning is that he's trying to break logic so that he can run the table because we get confused when you when he you know this is something called the bellman's fallacy for lewis caroll anything i repeat three times is true right and trump knows that would you just call that the bellman's fallacy it's lewis caroll um and it's anything i repeat three times is true and and the far right knows this the alt-right trolls know this so and they've built an echo chamber such that any line that gets put in the echo chamber gets repeated to the point where the left has to repeat it because now it's news yeah this was happening in the 20 i mean and they know they're doing it this was happening in the bush carry campaign they had already figured all of this out at bush carry right and then there's the uddle loop you all familiar with the uddle loop no um worth worth repeating jamae i think you know the uddle loop so the udda is john boyd um who was a marine flier um marine or air force maybe air force anyway he was a crazy colonel who um invented a bunch of super interesting things udda means observe orient decide and act and it's in the context of a dog fight so picture you're in uh in korea and you you you observe is i'm over north korea that guy seems to be in a mig 15 he's got a couple thousand feet on me when we're both climbing that's observed orient is he's probably a korean pilot trained by the russians his airplane is superior to me in climbing and firepower and turning but i can out dive and out flat whatever decide is i better get the hell out of dodge or i need to turn into him in this way because i can out my plane will outperform him and act just pull the joystick and boyd's concept was whoever does this loop faster wins the dog fight yeah because you're always resetting your understanding of the logistics of the situation one of the one of boyd's biggest fans was dick cheney who was sec def under ford so in the in the biography of john boyd in the acknowledgments this big thanks for dick cheney who was a big source of material on boyd and so i'm convinced that the far right completely understood the udda loop during the cheney bush campaign and they were busy using this to destabilize the left which never knew what hit them okay how do you spell that again orient oh oda observe orient decide act if you just google udda you'll get a an oodle of results and i can send you i can i'll put a link in my brain uh also so that you can see what i've got on udda because i've got a lot um here's the here's the link in my brain to udda um so all of this to say that from my perspective not trumps if he were being honest about his logic he would be saying i thought my crowd was bigger at the inauguration speech because i'm trying to debilitate everybody's hold on facts yeah because if i can do that then i can run the table for a long time yep yep yep and that and that this is an intentional provocation because i know that obama's crowd is bigger i can look at any two pictures i'm not an idiot but i know that if and this is that this is the taming of the shrew right this is um um what's it called gaslighting this is total gaslighting right this is the taming the shrew that i see the moon is out tonight it's like this clearly the sun is up there but you ain't gonna be able to live in this household unless you say that that's the moon so there we are now i can imagine other ways of representing this logic and the other person's brain but i'm not quite sure how and i'd be fascinated to see how they would do it so to me there's a challenge here for others to even represent what they believe in some consistent fashion that could do idea sex in this arena that's why i'm saying all of that i i think it's important to have that to to study that interaction between different um brain for lack of a better term for different brain structures yeah um i would encourage you to think about it not in terms of trump because that i i think talking trump talking the right in general tends to be well it's it's basically a mcgillis simulation um yeah so you need to think what would be another example of an alternate structure that might be difficult to immediately get into but would be fascinating to see how it would interact with yours you could do libertarianism i mean there's there's a bunch of belief systems that you know juxtaposed are interesting and you know within libertarianism isn't as interesting because there's parts of it that i like and parts of it that i can't stand and and it would force me to be clearer in my brain about those parts you know because each conversation like this causes me to refine how i represent it in my brain which i which i love um so there's that there's uh any there's any you know any number of things but most of which most of the interesting ones are a bit controversial right like original sin is really interesting original sin to me is a marketing tactic it's like let's just see we're going to make it so that everybody when they're born are born one down because somebody way back when had did a sin so they have to seek our self seek our advice and permission for for their own salvation that's perfect how else would we make religion so central in everybody's life so when i read matthew fox's original blessing that was the first christian i ever read whose work was tolerable i'm probably overstating that but but like the idea that we're born with original sin to me is this insanely clever marketing hack to make sure that central that that religion is absolutely central and vital in all of our lives and it's bullshit just like the edipus complex is bullshit mm-hmm well as a Baptist i couldn't agree more thank you um on the edipal complex um alice miller and jeffrey musiaf mason were the two people who were allowed into the Freud archives and um they discovered i think it was alice miller in one of her books i think they untouched key she discovers that Freud's earliest cases were catatonic women there were six or eight catatonic women he had been treating and he discovered during therapy that all of them had been abused by their fathers he could not report that in polite guineas society and i'm oversimplifying the plot here so he invents the edipus complex out of he pulls it out of his ass and what does the edipus complex say is that the child is trying to divide the child has sexual ambitions is trying to divide the mother and the father it basically reinflicts the trauma on the child yeah and yet all of these women had been abused by their fathers and were therefore in catatonic states because in victorian society you did not say that do that nothing of none of that bubble to the surface so of course they were catatonic right so then the edipal complex becomes a part of our culture a part of therapy it becomes dogma in some places it's sort of debunked but sort of not it's still in the back of our heads just like that stupid thing the tragedy of the commons which is another phrase i hate why do you hate that because the idiot who wrote that i say was not us it didn't understand commons and we all think that commons don't work because they're tragic because everyone because somebody always takes advantage of them it turns out that we used to understand how to live in the commons and it's a little complicated but it's completely doable and gerry's upset because everybody uses the phrase and nobody really supports it and nobody really understands it same thing happens with maslow's hierarchy of needs another one where when somebody brings up maslow's hierarchy my little bullshit you know radar goes glowing bright red so anyway i should write an article about these yeah because they all need to be debunked totally and they're not because they they're really good earworms that have become part of our culture right i never understood why i never could understand the tragedy of the commons yes it's well in a community where we all we had was commons and we used to live before we monetized everything and before we created market society which we now believe to be the only way society can possibly work um thank you jamai really appreciate it um and any other ideas you have on this thing yeah you know where to go thank you bye bye um where was i going i'd be curious to see you write up on the hierarchy of needs i know is uh he never talked out pyramid of needs right somebody else you know i have to go well we should we should fold up the call it's been it's been 90 minutes yeah i think i think the uh you know ideas that need to be debunked would be a great collection of things i will i will i will do some of that thank you all totally totally appreciate it yep