 This is an ogm on October 27, 2020. Sorry, go ahead. No, I'm sorry. I was just asking Ken, how are you doing? How's your area there? That's good. I'm, I'm much better now. I'm not my senses work wrapped up. So someone was asking me about this yesterday said I'm not necessarily happier, but I'm far less angry. I realized that I was really getting angry from everything I was seeing. And I just kept trying to not have it enter my life. But man, it was really, really anger making. So I feel a lot better than that regard. It's still fairly warm here. It gets up into the 70s during the day. And once the sun goes behind the ridge, it cools way off. So we're nighting outside. I'm sad. I live outside from, from basically much as I can from April to October. And I'm, I'm really looking at, okay, I'm going to have to be in the house now for the next few months. And without the general, you know, the usual use of being outside for social distancing events for the people. It's going to be a lot harder. I mean, on Zoom, I'd rather be sitting around a table. Yeah, it's so true. This call has no particular agenda other than questions, answers, brainstorming, throwing throwing ideas in the pot for Thursday's workshop. So I'd rather be available and go wherever the conversation wants to go and not use it so much as a check in round because that will lead our hour right away but rather see what we're leaning into. So I do have a question. And you sort of answered this for me and I'll probably just post it on to the OGM list I did. It was really great at making videos. So what I did was I took all the questions, I think, might have been Matt that that wrote them up. And I just answered them. So I have a lengthy list of my vision of the future looking back, you know, with five years. So is it okay just post that to the, the open goal mind list. Just a link to if you did in the Google Doc or something just put that on the Google Doc. Sure. That sounds great. Just add the link and put the following hashtag in your subject line. So we have 25 2025. Come stop. Just include that in the subject line and that will tag it and then I will add it to I've got to let me just show everybody the submissions I've got so far. So people sent you things that are not in the OGM list, because ideally we should read one another's, I don't know when I'll do that but I know exactly I think we should try to read each other's things. I'm harvesting them from the list I don't think anybody sent me one personally I think these are all things I've seen float by on the list. So Jack you're in there. Your romancing conversation topics presentation is in there Jack. I wanted, I wanted to comment on that. Owing to my schedule on Friday, Thursday's turning out to be a really nasty day. I expect to be in but I cannot make any guarantees of when I will enter and how long I can stay. So it may be that I need to withdraw doing a presentation. And basically I can rely on Mark Antoine speaking for topics that are important to me. I think I would like them to make that two presentations if like one speaking on behalf of Jack and speaking on mine, because we have a lot in common, but we also have a lot that's distinct. Yeah, and I don't mark I don't want you to sacrifice what you're bringing into the conversation yourself Mark Antoine, because you're carrying for two people, and I'm not sure we have put you we just did a little bit of team sorting people out into four teams who have registered and I know that the, you know, the participants are going to change a little bit between now and Thursday but we're pretty close. And I'm not sure you two are on the same team so it will be difficult for you Mark Antoine to represent for both. So I'll go, I'll take a look. Let me just share the list because it's in the matte the matte designed document that actually has all the agenda and all that we just put it in the bottom of that. So let me open that and give everybody a link to go look at it again. There we go. Come on computer do your thing a little faster. Other thoughts, questions. I did not complete work I wanted to do in the wiki but I have further thoughts on it that I'd like to discuss if there's time for that but maybe there's other questions first. That sounds great. Jackie we're going to say something. No, I do you have a sense of what time I would would talk. So take a look at the agenda the document that just put in. Go ahead and link to it and you'll see the agenda for Thursday, which is halfway down it says draft session in process. And so it starts and these are all all times are Eastern. So you've got to subtract a little bit. But we have basically two longish breakouts for for the teams and then the draft team list is at the very bottom of the document. And so, Jack and Mark on 20 currently on teams one and two separately. So, and then you know we were hoping to then bring everybody back in at 130 Eastern, which is I guess 1030 Pacific to sort of share back what the different breakouts did, and then an hour later to sort this out into okay so what does that mean we all need to try to do together. What makes me italics were people we thought had to bounce out of the meeting, and I will unitalicize can, because he just said that he's good to go he'd got he'd mixed up the times a little bit. And that is my sizing Jack. Yeah, thank you. Oh you also purpled him somehow. Oh, I know because I have time to the teams occur what what is the specific time of day. So if you look at the agenda. The first one is this synthesized so team. This is not clear but teams meet at 715. So we have a quick introduction. Can I screwed up and didn't mention to Matt that you would be interested in doing a 10 minute centering exercise. So let me get that to him and see if we can put that in the middle here. I apologize. Because I'd like to, I'd love to have that. So, so that's the timing. You're putting the teams that like California time 715 in the morning. Correct. I can guarantee you I am not home at that time. That's that's that's the day starts really early. And after probably order of magnitude. I'm back. And there's no guarantee on that. So you mean your work day with other materials starts really early. I am providing wheels from for Linda. Okay. Starts at seven in the morning. Gotcha. Okay. And so you've got to you got to be sure for a while at that hour. There's no way I could. That's kind of sad, but you could, you could call in. But you'd be driving, you'd be driving and all that, but you could call in. Yeah, that's the issue. So, It's cumbersome, but feasible. I feasible but impractical. Yes, there is that it's impractical cumbersome. It's it. Trust me, I'd love to be there, but I, I, I, you know, I made, I made a trades. Linda's providing wheels for me on Friday. So I have to provide them on Thursday. Then you have to give up your first born. Oh wait, that's long ago. My first born is 32 years old. I don't know too late to give them up. Yes. So I guess that's off the table. I mean, you're first born. I don't mean the whole logistics of Thursday. She was never up. I'm sure she was on a table at some point. I mean, seriously. Oh, yeah, you, you changed their diapers on a table. Exactly. Exactly. So at one point, somehow, anyway, it started to be distraction here. So if you, if you, if you want to consider dialing in and just trying to be in on the phone, we can help you with, I'll get you the number and all that kind of thing. Because it's in, you know, zoom generates dial in numbers as well. If not totally understand, and we will try to figure out how to, how to get in and through representing what you think. No, wait a minute. Do you have to have zoom in your phone to dial in. You can, you can use just a regular phone call. There's a, there's a dial in protocol just like free conference call used to have. I will, I will take you up on that. And, and again, it's not a guarantee, but I will carry the phone number with me and, and. Then you just need to, you need to give the presentation to link to someone and tell them next slide, please. Go to slide three, go to. Go ahead. Sorry, Jack. I, okay, I could make a print out of my presentation and have it with me. All right, so I will keep that, that idea in mind, but again, no guarantee. And also it's the same presentation that you sent that I've put in my brain, et cetera, that that's the presentation. Except that that that was just a draft. Right. And it's far from the story I want to tell. Okay, because if you send the link before Thursday, we can share the link with your teammates and people can both look at it beforehand and be paging through it themselves as you talk, for example, that would be really nice. I will do the best I can on that point. Nothing is guaranteed this week is weird. You know what there's an election in seven days that phrase nothing is guaranteed is like top of my mind right now. Yeah. And everything is weird. And everything is weird. Yeah. And it is what it is. Somebody said that. Yeah, right. So, and also I'm working on my contribution to the Thursday thing. I thought I was going to get it done over the weekend didn't, but I should have the text done tonight and I was going to record it also. So I will put that out. If, if the winds are with me, I'll put that out late tonight. So I just want to say let's make sure that we don't put Jack in a position where he'd be distracted driving. So if I will not do this when I'm driving, trust me. Okay. All right. Great. I just don't want you to be going next slide trying to look at your print out and drive. That's not. Hey, don't cut me off. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know for that shit. The thing is that, that, that. I will be parked. And if I know that I'm going to be parked long enough, I will take it on and I may be in the middle of a talk and have to go. Take your phone charger and your cigarette lighter plugin. That's how I do it. Excellent. Your vitamins. And the thermos of coffee. Words to that effect. Or something. Cool. Other thoughts, other questions, other. Thank you. Happy to be solving some logistics here too. It's, it's a, we really want you to be a part of it. I do. And if we don't have questions about Thursday, then what else? That's OGM. Would you like to talk about Mark Antoine? Do you want to talk more about the low wiki? Yeah. So the initial wiki. Pattern I had proposed and maybe I should put. The. Design link. Back in the. Or share screen. That's easier. Oh, where's my. Well, let me give you a screen access. Maybe useful. Good. So you have, you have. Yeah, this one. Do it. There we go. Good. So tools to that review. That's what you're saying. Seeing. Yes. Yes. Okay. So we, we had started dividing this director issues patterns. And then I'm like, okay, well, we also want, maybe I also want tools to see this tool is using this pattern and enabling that pattern. Right. And then I realized, well, this is for more for technical tools. What about methodologies? And when is the methodology of pattern as opposed to a tool? I mean, I think we do want to extract patterns from. Methodologies and tools. Do we want. Because it's, it's a higher level of abstraction. So is that something that we want people to describe their tools or other tools that need not be theirs? Like the brain is a tool, I guess. The. Or is that out of scope for. The pattern language. That's, I'd like to have feedback on that. So two comments. First, let me frame this so that Romer and Ken and everybody are sort of up to speed. I'm going to go back to the previous conversation in the previous brain group. We would like to develop a pattern language for OGM for how we work, what we do. The pattern language is a distillation of wisdom from a discipline. So in a pattern language, the first book to sort of explain this, it was the wisdom of how do you design a village all the way down from the airplane view of what is green space? What is building space all the way down to, you know, make sure you put niches in for children, for kids in your home as you've designed. And this was all distilled wisdom, which is bubbled down to memorable titles. And then a series of fields that recur. Across each of the patterns. So there's a, what are the forces at play that caused this to be an interesting thing? What is our solution to the forces of play? And then a bunch of other things. And so the document that Mark Antoine just shared with us. Is basically a document that outlines what those fields would be and how the pattern language would work. And so I think if that's not enough framing, let me know. And then a rumor, go ahead. Yeah, my follow up question with that Jerry is where, where do we do the extractions of this languages? So, so this document is a design document that you won't need to look at for a wiki that Mark Antoine can also show. That is where we would actually, which is, which looks roughly like this. It's, it's an edit mode and it's deep in edit mode, but can you just go to a template? Oh no, and I can't because. He's been working. It's backup. Oh, you have a link in key base or I can just put it here too. I got it in key base. Thank you. Different. And it's okay if I share it with everybody. So rumor, the pieces you would see is the piece that Mark Antoine is about to show, which will look like a form basically on a, on a webpage, which is, which happens to be on a wiki and the form will step you through the things to answer for a particular pattern that then connects to other patterns. And we're using semantic wiki media wiki, because it's really, really brilliant about the semantic links so that when you say that this pattern here depends on this other pattern over there and affects this pattern down further down the food chain, semantic media wiki is really good at making those links and doing the back links. See here when I define protocol, and this is a form. So it addresses silos. So I can add if there were another issue, I could say, well, it also addresses this one. These are links to pages. And because I've put silos in what this pattern addresses. So this is what I'm trying to do. I, by the way, I find it useful to call this a structured database rather than a wiki. Because we're not going to use it like a wiki very much. Even though. Which brings me to this point. So I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to, I'm going to call it a wiki. Like a wiki. Yeah. I'm just going to use the wiki function, which brings me to the second point. It's a, it's a, it's a, it's a mix because within the wiki, within each field you have wiki function. That's. Yeah. That's right. The distinction. I think most people, when you say wiki, they have a particular idea of, you know, it's, I, I get it kind of it's a hypertext. And yeah, we're going to use some of the wiki features of this structured database is the way that I think it'll be most useful for people. So to answer Mark Antoine's question about methodologies and tools, I'm on both sides of it on the one hand. I think clearly we need to mix in methodologies and tools. On the other hand, my fear is that everything we do to make the form more daunting and to have more fields will catastrophically reduce the likelihood anybody's going to go in and mess with it. And so if we used wiki style internal links in what we say about the patterns mentioning tools and methodologies, we could later retrofit and upgrade and do something else around those and map to them. But my fear is that if we add them in early, we're going to kill participation. Please, Mark Antoine. OK, that's a good point. For me, they were not part of the form. Each tool would get a page. Each methodology would get a page. And what you get in the form is links to this. Now, it does make entry a multi-step process, which is maybe more difficult. So maybe we should describe it as text and we'll factor them into their own page later as a way for people who don't want to create a page and look at link mechanics to make it easier for them. I don't know. I'm trying to think of what's the right balance here. Yeah. Anybody else have feelings on this? Yeah, one more question is, where do we foresee this tool being used? Any specific area of OGM or, yeah? I think it depends what we think OGM is. But from what I understand, OGM is about collective intelligence and patterns of using collective intelligence to solve problems. And so we want to understand, we want to have a catalog of the techniques we may apply to that broadly defined goal. And the techniques are one thing and the tools are another. But what are the deeper patterns that recur and that we may use in designing new tools and techniques is what we're trying to answer. Jerry, maybe you had another perspective. And maybe just an example to elaborate. A pattern I would try to put in here at the beginning and then enter into conversation, rather, because I'm sure that this is not the right pattern at the end, but it's basically, let's not reinvent the wheel. And by that pattern, I mean that for everything that OGM doesn't touch is, don't go start a new movement. If there's a movement over there that we can actually help and incorporate and be part of. Don't write new code if there's code that exists like semantic media wiki or tiddly wiki or whatever. Let's adapt appropriate. And then what we'll see is that there's framework missing. There's glue missing. There's a protocol missing. We can write that. And then we're basically acting as connectors. But don't reinvent the wheel, I think becomes a pattern that goes into the OGM pattern language. Does that make sense? And does anybody else agree? That makes sense to me. Yeah. And so we need, so, so rumor, the pattern language is meant to be a pithy and quick way to onboard new people, a good way for us to agree on how we work together. Right? So like some new, some new project shows up and we then start talking about how to incorporate what to do. And then somebody will say, no, no, no, we could do that except it would violate a pattern we've agreed to before. And so let's not do that. Let's obey the pattern, which then leads us to do it in this other way. Is there a way to look at all of this? You know, I redid the kiss acronym because I call it keep it seriously simple. And I think that's gonna be really important going forward with this so that we don't end up with incredible complexity. So maybe that's something that would warrant a little bit of discussion even this week in the workshop because we wanna build on existing things, not change massively, which confounds participation. Well, I've said what I wanted to say. And you've echoed a piece of our conversation, I was it yesterday? Yeah, I guess it was yesterday about, about this pattern language wiki or structured database, which is pattern language is a really only good and useful and functional when they're very crystalline, crisp, succinct, pithy, name your word. But a piece of the process of making the pattern language is to make sure it doesn't turn into really big essays. I love Michelle Bowens and I love the peer-to-peer foundation project. But when I go to the peer-to-peer foundation wiki and look around, everything is really, really, really lengthy, it's not pithy and I have a huge trouble sort of getting through it. It's the similar to my problem. I used to use Google's Newsreader until they deprecated it, but I would go in there and I would read like three things. And Twitter, I read 500 things and then I follow links to a couple of really good things because Twitter enforces, you know, pithiness. Exactly, succinctness. So for me, Twitter is a better filter for what's worth reading later than a newsreader or whatever else. So what we're trying to do here is be both pithy but wise and so we don't wanna put in be good to everybody as a pattern language pattern, right? It's like, of course we should be good to everybody but there might be other sorts of assumptions like assume good intent might actually be a pattern in our wiki because that's different from be good to everybody, like obey the golden rule. Mac Antoine, à toi. Totally agreement except one thing, pithiness is an end result. It's something you get at the end of the process. It's not something you can assume you'll have all along. It requires work. The famous Exocryphal Pascal quote, sorry for this long letter that I did not have time to make short. Yeah, exactly. But I think that there are adjectives we can encourage in terms of brevity, succinctness, focus, key points, other things that are able to be institutionalized in a process mode. And along that same line, and forgive me, Jerry, if this is already well embedded but I know you're talking about a different platform for the brain that would do more things that we would want it to do, freeing it. And it would be helpful to be able to segregate the process dimensions from the fact dimensions in many key topic areas because that would help people regulate and implement further forward. And I agree totally. And for me, this is the point of the pattern language. The pattern language is all about process. It may mention tools, it may mention methodologies, but that's also process, right? Right. It's not about facts, that's very, very, very clear. Another precision, I think some of the patterns you named, some of them are patterns and some of them are very much hinting to anti-patterns. And it will always be like each pattern has its shadow anti-pattern issue. What is patterns trying to solve? It's true that when I put protocol as a pattern, I should maybe rephrase it as protocol versus tools or protocol versus one tool to rule them all. Yep. An important thing is what we call each pattern because they need to be a little tongue in cheek, a little memorable, otherwise they don't stick and otherwise we don't kind of get them and we don't wind up using them in conversation. So we know the pattern language is working when we're busy doing our work as OGM and we start citing the patterns. That's a total sign of success that the pattern language is working. Just to backtrack a little bit, can you just give an example of the separation you were talking about, Judy or Marc-Antoine, a moment ago between... Well, I guess I think of the brain as leading me on a massive encyclopedic mind map of thoughts connected to other thoughts. And sometimes under thoughts, there are specific organizations or groups or activities that are fostering the development or evolution of that thought. But having those two dimensions clarified so that if I, let's say I wanna know the top five organizations that are doing something globally in regenerative agriculture just because that's Klaus's favorite. How do I get to those past instead of feeding through a lot of other directions? It's a different dimensionality. And also I'm trying to... One of the tensions I'm trying to manage or polarities I'm trying to manage is how do we stay kind of meta in OGM so that we can be more helpful to very specific initiatives like Klaus's on soil fertility and regenerative act. And like Kevin Jones's on neighborhood economics and so forth. And so it's really useful to have extremely concrete cases and people passionate about domains but we need to figure out how to take that energy and turn it into something more meta at this level of discussion. Maybe it's something like case studies. Yeah. Because then you can replicate what someone else did. You don't have to reinvent the whole process. And that might be an extraction. I'm sorry. No, no. It's when you said case studies, I was just writing it in the pattern language like tools methodologies and case studies. It's like, yes. Other thoughts, other questions? Pete. One of my observations about Alexander's A pattern language is that it's got a lot of hierarchy too. And usually in graph things, hierarchy is kind of a no-no. But I think along with pithiness and conciseness and brevity, the hierarchy of A pattern language means that you can find your way to the right place where you need to work. So I think that's an important goal. Something again that you won't have early on but as it continues to evolve, I think it's a good thing. And in the original A pattern language, there was kind of a natural hierarchy because it was about how do you design a very livable village. And so they were at the highest level, it was kind of land use. And at the very lowest level, it was once you were inside a house and in the middle were things like the transition from the street into the house. That's a pattern, right? And then after that comes a pattern for how do you place doors and windows on a wall? But before that comes, how do you site a house on a lot? And the order of those patterns in the more or less hierarchy was also a distilled wisdom. I think it's a good point. And it's obvious what the hierarchy is in hindsight. But when they were working on it, I'm not sure that it was necessarily, it was probably kind of like, oh, I've got lots of things to think about. How would I organize this? What would the hierarchy be like? I think in software patterns, which were inspired by Alexander's work, we ended up with kind of a big mishmash of stuff. And we could have had, I think, better hierarchy in software patterns and that would have helped people adopt it more. But it was kind of like everything got thrown in a bucket kind of and it's not as well, groomed. The software patterns used more the dependency link than the, and then there was the enterprise software pattern work of Fowler, which is kind of higher scale software patterns. But it came later. But I have the scale variable in the pattern, which I think is what you were talking about. But I think that the usage also forms a hierarchy. I think it's a multi-hyverarchy. I agree, and that way it's a graph, but I agree hierarchies are important, but there's more than one axis. Scale is an axis, and dependency is an axis. Highly key is a navigational feature of certain kinds of pattern languages. And then there are other ways to traverse them as well. I think that'll work well. A really brief and fun side story. So Dick Gabriel, who also goes by Richard Gabriel, is a poet, a genius, and has done a whole bunch of super interesting things in his life, one of which was befriending Christopher Alexander, which is no mean feat because Christopher Alexander is a paranoid, kind of crazy old geezer now. And so Gabriel basically saw the pattern language stuff and carried it over. He's been the chairman of UPSLA for a long time, invited me to do a keynote at UPSLA in 2002 that I've put on YouTube. So I can go put that link in our chat if anybody ever wants to see that. And I watched that talk more recently and I was like, holy crap, wow. That's the talk when at the end of it, when I used Yin and Yang and at the end of it, a young Asian American woman walked up to me and she said, I think you mean Yin is the feminine, right? Cause I had reversed them. Hadn't done that much homework at the time. But anyway, so Gabriel noticed the pattern language stuff from Alexander, took it over into UPSLA and helped make it a part of what it does now in software. And a lot of people in software love pattern languages more than architects do because in architecture and urban planning, it means eagelessness. And there's a whole lot of ego in architecture and urban planning. It's like, oh, that's an IM pay. That's a Michael Graves building. And Alexander is saying the opposite. He's saying the opposite that the people who occupy space should actually get to design this space, which is why they invent a pattern language in the first place. And then last piece of the story. So Gabriel got first like galley drafts of the nature of order, which is Christopher Alexander's four volume tome about beauty, the nature of beauty. And so Gabriel was kind of an early reader and critic of it and stuff like that. Super, super interesting. And Gabriel can go way deep into all of this. Also, Kenneth Tyler, who's in OGM, he and I and a couple of other people had a book club way back when trying to read our way through the nature of order. We never made it through the first like 50 pages, but it was fascinating. It was really, so Kenneth runs really deep on this stuff as well. Back to our regularly scheduled program, which is already in progress. I've got a quick question for Mark Antoine. I wonder if you have maybe, or if perhaps we could make an anterior relationship diagram out of this. And then I wonder if that's useful, will be useful for other people or not. I think it would be, even if you haven't read them before. I can do that. Absolutely, that's important. I approve, it will be, I'll use dot or something like that. I think it'll be fun for people, I hope. Okay, I'm on it. I'm on other things. I'll put a link to entity relationship diagrams in the chat. It might be late, but it'll happen. Oh, and I'll find that, my oops, let's talk. Do you want to share now and see what else is up? Romer, what do you mean by extracting? You're muted. Oh, hi Pete. I was referring to as the tool extracts the different relationship for specific pattern. Are this information or data being extracted? Are this like static data or that's already been part of our governing document or are this like dynamic that continuously evolve us? It's the tool, I don't think, actually Mark and Trondi, do you want to share with us maybe? It doesn't do that much. It's a tool for expressing pattern language. It is very much a wiki, it is very much a wiki. A wiki, okay. But it has some computed queries. See, when I'm saying, not this, yeah. The example I gave is here I explicitly said that protocol addresses silos, data silos, but because I made that by hand operation, that by hand reference, this one came automatically. So that's all the extraction it does. It's not much. It's automated backlinks. The relationships are automatically updated unlike a regular wiki. But the work of expressing a pattern, kind of ideating, observing a pattern saying, and then talking especially, I think this is a pattern and somebody else might say, well, if we make it a little bit bigger, a little bit smaller or express it a little bit differently, I feel like that captures what we're talking about as a pattern better. So this is really kind of conceptually, if you think of this tool as a whiteboard that has a little bit of structured help as we express a pattern, that's kind of what we wanna do with this tool, at least for a while. At some point, it'll be a lot more like a presentation or like what I would think of as a wiki, something finished, more finished, not static, but more finished, or a book or a deck of cards or something like that. It'll be something where it's become a repository of patterns. But for a while, it's gonna be just a smart whiteboard that lets us say, I think this is a pattern and then other people can go and then we can look at it in the structure of all the other patterns and go, it doesn't fit, it fits. If we adjust the scale value of this one, it'll make the whole structure better, that sort of thing. Let me add something because remember you've brought this up a couple of times. In social network analysis, you could run software against the emails that are sent internally inside of a company and you could then derive from who sent what to whom how often, you could derive a map of the organization. So the software would be doing a lot of work deriving patterns of communication inside the enterprise. And that's social network analysis. The job of creating a pattern language is completely human. We're not running software against the database of anything to try to figure out what patterns we're saying. There's no algorithm that can derive the pattern language, but us humans. Now, there might be a GPT-3 AI that could do it with us and I'm not even gonna go there, but at this level, the Wiki is only functioning as a whiteboard, as Pete just said. It's only a structured place for us to share what we think the patterns are, but this is all coming out of social conversations of how, what we think is important, what to name it, how to describe it, all of that. Does that make sense? Yes, it does now. Thank you. Yes. Okay, because social network analysis is totally different and Baldus Krebs is a friend of ours and he's been doing social network analysis for probably 30 years, right? And there's definitely algorithms in there that are deriving important information that's not happening in this particular task. That's what I was thinking earlier, yeah. That's what I thought. Cool, Judy. There might be a third vector to this dimensionality of the new brain, whatever we're gonna call it, because as we're talking, I'm sort of hearing the process piece of case studies, how people are working on it. And so forth. There's the content piece that's the kind of classic. Here's the context that you talked about when you first started the brain discussions recently, making decisions in the context of knowledge and thought and other things that exist. And then there's a piece that's really the formation of new processes and the bringing to this very dynamic. And I don't know how we capture that at this point, but I don't wanna lose sight of that dynamic dimension because it's easy to slip into cataloging instead of learning. Agreed, agreed. And one of my filters is that something should be kind of a little bit novel and different from what you would expect there to be there to be worth putting in the pattern language. Like the example I gave earlier, let's be good to everybody is just sort of too obvious a good behavior, but let's assume good intent is unusual and might make it in. But a pattern language that gets too cluttered is a useless pattern language as well. I also wanna say that at the top of the, I'd like to end this call at the top of the hour because I'm having a different zoom with the creator of the Weissaurus. And if anybody wants to hang out for that, I think he'd be totally open to doing it that he's gonna sort of show me what it is. His name is Joshua Frankel. He's gotten in touch and basically their tagline is the best arguments for everything. So it's an argumentation sort of system. But if you're interested and you wanna hang out, please do. But I have to switch calls at the top of the hour. It's an interesting tool. I've seen it and I recommend seeing it. Are you gonna stay in a different, go to a different room than Jerry? I'm hosting it in my Zoom, which is this one. So it'll be right here. Okay, so I'll end the recording. I'll end this recording and I'll start a new recording if he's okay with recording it. I might stay for just a little bit to get a sense of what it's about. Cool. So who goes to everybody for the hard work? I have a few minutes if you don't mind, Jerry. You what? I have a few minutes to just get sense of it. Awesome, great. That sounds great. Jerry, sorry to insist, but it would be nice to have set the DNS for this. Oh, oh, oh, sorry. So Pete, I need to give you- We haven't directly asked you, yes. Yeah, yeah. No, I forgot that that was a to-do item. So I should go to Google Domains and give you access to create a subdomain on open global mind? Or just you create the subdomain and point it to that- It's just an air record. Domains.google.com, please hold. Yeah, and- I'm happy to do that. Yeah. I'd also like to note, I think we're gonna call this tool pattern jam openglobalmind.com. Pattern jamming is, the phrase pattern jamming is something that Charles- Why don't I share screen and you can talk me through it? Yay, DNS. So here's Google Domains- DNS on the left. DNS on the left, yep. Sorry to impose that to everybody, but it's fast. I think everybody be like, whoa, this is what you do. Okay, register a synthetic records. So hostname, you got it? Oh, up here, hostname, got it. Yeah, so pattern jam. Probably- Come, Sam. Yeah, I would probably do with all minus, but you know, actually just read somebody saying it's better to use camel case for handicap person. Yeah. A screen reader will read camel case for worse. A screen reader does do better with camel case. I'm good either way. So shall I just add it? The idea is- And then the IP address as in the chat. 44 to 39, but it's in the chat. Oh, got it. So copy that out of the chat. Yep. Oops, I gotta go to the chat because, there we go, here's the chat. Think. Scroll up. Or I can read it. 44 to 39, 58, 206. We've been writing a lot of stuff. Where did I just skip over it? I can't find one of us who'll have to edit local settings too, I think. Yep. All right, I'm not actually even seeing it. Is it before Balzac? Yes, found it. It's all the way at the bottom. Got it. Oh, you just tried probably put it in again, but I just found it. Let me go back. Let me move my damn chat. It's funny because that window's invisible to us, so we see the mouse going seemingly at random. Exactly. And now, because the header of that thing is basically over, there we go. Now I can't get rid of it. Now I can't paste. Okay, good. Like before. Is that what you want? Yeah, remove the slash around it, sorry. It's just... Just the numbers. Just the numbers. Just the numbers. So kill the HTTP at the start. Yeah. So comes up. Comes up. Yes. What else? That's it. That's what we need. The rest is ours to do. Okay, good. So you're cool with that. So that's all set. Yes. Mark and Chuan, we presumably won't have SMTP for a while and that's fine. That's fine. I think we'll do it later. Or I'll do it if I find the time, but... I think we might need tomorrow. There might be more SMTP stuff. Sorry, Judy. There might be more DNS settings when we do SMTP. Yeah, okay. Needs to propagate because I don't have it yet. And, well, okay, cool. Judy, what are you gonna say? I was just, I need to go to technology school. Or not. That was like hardcore plumbing. Although it's actually also something you do when you set up your blog. If you want to get really into it. So one of the reasons I use Google Sites a lot is that I'm really not a geek, but I figured out a way where I can buy a domain on Google Domains, which is where I'm trying to move all my domains now. I buy a domain on Google Domains, I start a site on Google Sites, and then I do three, four simple steps that basically makes it look like a pro website because I masked the URL so that you go to openglobalmind.com, it actually goes to a website instead of going to sites.google.com slash something slash open global mind, which looks really un-pro. And so I can build a super simple website with a new brand new domain in an hour, no problem. And it's up and it's running and it's actually pretty sophisticated. And if I want to do something better, like I need help and somebody else needs to come in because I've abandoned all my WordPress websites, I hate WordPress, but I'm not smart enough to do Joomla or whatever. Like there's a, I know there's a hundred other. There's too many options. And so I, you know, this is like, this is sort of like, you know, take 70 years off my age and teach me how to do this stuff, you know. But if you wanted to, if you wanted to be able to do what I've done with Google Sites, I can teach you that in a little bit. I can share with you the instructions for what like the tiny bit of technical plumbing I just did. It's sort of like that, but it's easy. It's easy enough to do. So that's great because I don't, I might have the capacity, but I don't know if I have the time to learn all the things I'm wanting to learn as I sit with all of these high-powered people. So. Another alternative is to have a minion. Yes, hire a minion totally. Yeah. Other thoughts, other feedback, other questions about Thursday or anything else? Oh, GME. Are you getting lots of good input for Thursday in terms of what we want for the workshop to be productive? I think so. We've gotten some sort of essays and videos and other sorts of things, which is great. I need to finish mine, but the stimulus for all of this really worked out well. And then small side note, I was in a different, totally different group call a couple of weeks ago and one of the people in that group call pinged me and said, hey, I liked your brain thing and what you're working on and your OGM thing, let's talk. So his name is Jordan Sukut and he started something called Lion's Burg, which, and he started telling me about it. I'm like, is this like steward ownership? And he's like, yeah, kind of like that. And steward ownership is a really interesting business model that goes back to the size foundation, size being the lens, the German lens maker. And as I understand it, which is like really superficial right now, you build the nonprofit foundation, which is the sole stock shareholder of a for-profit corporation, which then engages in a variety of different activities which could have different business models themselves. But this shell basically protects the for-profit from acquisition, from a bunch of stuff, lets you put materials in the public domain well. It kind of creates a mechanism that's really healthy for the kind of things we want to do here. So. Sounds interesting to explore. Yeah, so I'm gonna, I'll put a link to my brain for the steward ownership thing because it really is interesting. There might be an opportunity for true creativity in the alliance of foundation and commercial that goes well beyond conventional current legal structures that we could evolve over time with what we're trying to do. Oh, cool. And Jack's got a link already for us on what steward ownership is great. Great. Yeah, and Ken, then Jack, I'm curious whether you've heard much about it and what you think about it. So Ken, go ahead. Well, mine is actually a totally different topic. I just was looking at the Google Doc that you sent with the framework for Thursday and I realized why I confused the times. Because they're all in Eastern. It's like it's on East Coast. So it's possible other people may have that. So maybe just a little reminder to go out to the list of please it is 7 a.m. Because that's why I said I can't be there from one to two. So I will do that. I'll send a reminder with folks in Europe too or folks in non-U.S. who may have switched off to practice at a time already. The other thing to just be a heads up because it came up with our snarky group is that Europe has changed off like saving time. So the interval gap is different for a few weeks, a week basically, where from central to Europe is now six hours instead of seven. And then after the first when we go off daylight, then it'll be seven again. But that might be something to contemplate in communications. I'm hoping that everyone who's engaged with it realizes where they are. But it actually screwed something up earlier this week. Sorry, Judy. I just added all times Eastern to the table right there in big type. And I'll say it in a pre-event message tonight as well. Thanks, Ken. Jack, you have no strong feelings about stewardship? And does anybody? Anybody heard about these things? I mean, the Science Foundation pioneered this apparently ages ago, like a long time ago. And I was heading toward public benefit corporation and other sorts of things like that as a reasonable structure. This seems to allow you to do those kinds of things also with a bigger, more interesting container. And I'm kind of in a conversation with Jordan at this point to try to figure out, might OGM be a really good incubator participant in their initiative, which would help them help us and would be a really nice kind of symbiotic thing? So we'll see. We'll see how that goes. Sounds great. So one of the things that I was answering questions is, are we set up? How are we set up? And so I also put public benefit corporation. But this, I've not heard of this. And it sounds like a really interesting way to go about it. The other thing I'm wondering about is if there might be something from the Mondrogram cooperatives that we could learn from as a pattern that would help us. So I'm part of the Dig Life cooperative, and then we've sort of spun off a little thing called sense compass with Christina Bowen and Terrells and a couple other people. And we were hunting around for, there's a thing called a multi-stakeholder cooperative. Only problem. Very few states acknowledge it. There's no track record for doing stuff, et cetera, et cetera. So I think we opted to create sense compass as a worker-owned cooperative registered in the state of Washington because the laws were better. We could find a lawyer, et cetera, et cetera. So that happened like a couple years ago. Christina would know better about the process and what happened. What's interesting is that the newer the model, the less pervasive it is and the less help you have and the fewer people there are that have walked that path before you. Google funded Nathan Schneider at University of Colorado Boulder, who's a friend, to go explore some of these models. They gave him a million bucks to go figure out what are platform cooperative friendly business models. I don't know if that's gotten anywhere. But the whole platform co-op movement was an attempt, a poorly named but very earnest and smart attempt to go figure out how do we build new platforms. I went to the first platform co-op event in New York four years ago, I guess, three years ago. And the opening question was, why isn't Uber a worker-owned co-op? Uber is a fake marketplace. You get to be a driver or not a driver and you get to choose when you drive or you don't. Everything else, you don't get to choose or set. You are forced to adapt to their terms. If you want to do a price war, you're screwed. And I hate that. I can't stand that about it. So their question was, why isn't this a worker-owned co-op? And why don't workers reap the benefits of whatever it is that ride sharing does? Which I'm a big fan of ride sharing. So that's another movement that we can draw from and learn from as well. Part of it, I think, Jerry, is that the worker-owned co-op is intrinsically tritrust and all of the other structures are non-trust with rules and prohibitions. So that's part of the challenge. Yeah. I'm opening up Google Domains again. Just checking all the values and stuff. Sorry about that, but it didn't seem to work well. Apologies. We needed to work. Charles, I wonder if you got bit by summertime. We're still on summertime in the US. I totally did. And I remembered five minutes before the end, at least, instead of after. But hi, everyone. And gee, I was psyched about today, and I just messed up entirely. And Lauren was planning to come, but then she couldn't anyway. But hi. Anyone want to give a recap before the end? We can. And I also have a different call coming in in four minutes at the top of the hour with a company called Wysaurus. And you're welcome to stay for it. I think they'd be eager to explain what they're doing for other people as well. But we're switching calls in four minutes. So here's what is in. Is this OK? It does look good. Let's look at the TTL too, if we can find it. Where do I find that? Maybe at it. Actually, show me the, yeah, nscloudy1.googledomains.com. Let me try adding that. ns. Scroll back up and where it says nscloud. nscloudy1, OK. Yep, nscloudy1. Google the names. Yep, the name servers. nscloud. We can ask those directly. And Charles, we talked a bit about the pattern language aspects. First, we had some questions and some logistics. Jack is going to be driving and a couple other things about getting on the call for Thursday and participation. Then we shifted over to some pattern language stuff, which Mark, Anton, and Pete have been working on. They're using semantic media wiki to basically build up a place where we can go together write a pattern language, which would be awesome. And so we want to make that part of what's happening on Thursday. And what we're doing here is the reason I'm screen sharing is that they're trying to make it so that we don't have to send people to a numeric URL. Instead, we send them to pattern. As soon as that would be. Yeah, patternjam.openglobalmind.com should work, but isn't yet. Not even on the Google in a server. So I'm really OK with this. It's not working somehow. It's not working somehow. Let me go down. Scroll down to some resource records. Let's add it here. Let's add it in this one. Patternjam. So go here and say patternjam now. Yeah, here. I love that there's some uptake on the patternjam concept. This is beautiful. And what am I choosing here? A, yes. Just A? Just A. 1h is fine. And then put the same. 1h is make that like 15m. For now. And then here, let me find the address without the goobers. Like that? Yeah. Added. They'll take effort within the next 48 hours. They're just covering their ass, I think. I think that's right. So there we go. Here's the rest of the mail stuff. But that's it. No, actually the other thing is that that was where the TTLs were too. So look at that star. It says 15 minutes. Where are you? OK, so I'll tell you later if it hasn't worked right now. I don't see it yet. But it could just be. That's why we might have to wait for 15 minutes. Yeah. We're 48 hours. Yeah, exactly. Hopefully not. OK. All right, we have another call coming in now. Let me stop sharing. Anybody who wants to stay and learn about the Ysaurus? What is it? Or what's the kind of hook that I might want? It's an arc. Mark and Juan, you know more about it than I do. It's an argumentation mapping platform. It's a well-designed one. It's worth learning about. I've seen that demo, so I'll leave. Hi, Jean. Nice to see you. So I do encourage you to see what's going on. Have fun. Hey, Jean. Let me stop the current recording. Is that going to be an hour? Or what's this?