 That's actually a can. This is the Neo books call on Monday, March 4, 2024. And we were just talking about some of the zoom features. Sorry, Pete, you're going to explain. It's confusing that AI companion and the AI summary are different things. Yes. And so smart recording is on but I but I'm not getting a summary now so I don't know actually how to turn on the AI summary. The way I do it and we're different. If you somewhere on the bottom buttons, you can say start summary, which is how I've been doing it. I started doing the call for me. It's next to share screen and companion. What's the difference between companion companion is something that you can ask questions of during the call. So, and the idea is, oh, I joined the call late. So instead of interrupting everybody and saying what did I miss you can ask the companion. What did I miss or did, you know, did Sherry share that thing that she was going to talk about or whatever, you know, that's the theory. I've never played with it. I enabled it, which means later in the call you could use a companion. I'm not entirely sure how but that's right. You could basically quiz it about our meeting. Too bad we don't know what it's for. For what it's worth when I click a companion it says ask us to start a companion. So it thinks and a companion should be on. Welcome to your companion. Oh, I see. I'm going to start it. No, it says I got a thing that says it's on. Good. So I just turned on four things for. So the other odd thing is, I don't get summaries with the recording in the zoom recording files, I get the summary in my email. Yes, which is how I was getting it before it wasn't one of the downloadables. And I was just saving it as as a PDF and then attaching it with the other files when I upload them to our channel. The formatting of that is I'm using a PDF is a good way to share it. I've been wanting I put it in into wiki pages, but to do that I have to like copy it into like plain text and then re bold the headers and pain. Hey Dave. Hey Chris. Glad to have you here. I have started a 30 minute timer so we can circle back around and ask the AI companion, what the summary was so we could see the thing in live action. And throughout if in fact we could just sit here and talk about a book and have the AI write the book for us. I like that a lot. Talk the book through. And so we won't. We'll ask it for a summary but we'll also ask it some, some, like, particular questions, you know, what did Chris say. What did Stacy say what did, you know, what are the, the, I don't know, something like that, did we talk about. It's funny I can't mention a thing, a topic that we might talk about because yeah, that'll spoil the trailer. How is how is everybody this bright and beautiful morning, although it's turned back into winter in Portland. I got home from a junket, late last night. Very interesting. I figured I can say this on the recording but I sort of figured out the plot, although it took me a long time and a little investigating I was like, I'm finding this and why, like, what's the deal here. And I'm pretty sure now that this was a PMI junket. Anybody recognize the initials PMI. I have it mortgage insurance. I'm sure that's not what it is. That is not it. Which other PMI right. That's a project management institute I believe there is that it's not that one the other. So without Google, management fellows, I don't know. Yep, yep. Nobody's got okay you can Google if you must Pete you probably Googled it immediately. I'm asking Chachi PT what's the great circle distance from Oregon to. Oh, to Bahrain. I figure you're going to tell us. Tell us what PMI is so PMI is the reformulated Philip Morris International. Okay, so my current take on the plot of the weekend was is they are sponsors of Ferrari because we had a paddock club club right above the Ferrari paddock, the Ferrari garage rather. And as part of the so we got to attend the Bahrain Grand Prix. I was on a panel on Friday. No, Saturday. Yeah, Friday morning. I was on a panel and that was my duty and it was a short panel about AI and sorry about the metaverse. I was the skeptic on the panel panel went great. Everybody was asking me questions throughout the weekend that worked really well it was it was like just too short a panel but it was conversations the whole weekend. But it's kind of the quid pro quo was hey you get to attend the Bahrain Grand Prix which is the first Grand Prix of the season. They have all new cars. I am not a big F1 fan, and I've never attended a car race. So I kind of started at the top with VIP treatment that like first Grand Prix. And it was, it was a pretty memorable event, but but it took me a while to figure out the plot. So I basically was a beard for Philip Morris. Which seems to be trying to switch itself to a smokeless company and seems to be doing pretty well on that and be earnest about it, but, but nobody was that upfront about the whole plot so it was, it was very interesting. And the attendees I have no idea how they picked them I don't think any of them paid anything. So my Philip Morris spent lots of dough on this weekend. They like whenever you showed up for a meal. There was food for 100 people but we're only like 40. And I was like, who can eat all this what's what's going on here was that just quantity or was it also variety varieties to yeah yeah we went to a Asian restaurant for dinner. Friday night, Saturday night, Friday night, because I traveled all day Sunday to get home. And there were like five stations, one of which was like 10 steam trays. So the crazy crazy wild variety of foods. Oh, and then Saturday night after everything was over after the race there was a party and the DJ, not even going to remember his name, but the DJ is like famous famous and is the hold on a second let me let me find it. Like if you pull up DJ Khaled and like that's the guy like not that one. So, so Mark Ronson, who is the guy who did uptown funk and a bunch of other stuff including a couple people's albums who you would recognize. So he was he just shows up start DJing. And I'm like, I sort of know his name and I had him in my brain already I like, like I kind of knew who Mark Ronson was but I didn't really know. And Bahrain is almost 12 hours opposite us it was a you know, I basically would add an hour if it was 6pm over there I would add an hour and turn am to PM and I had the right local time and on the West Coast. So, it was always like kind of fun. By the way, avoid Istanbul's new airport. They have a brand new gigantic tour airport that replaces the ATA tour airport and it's a it's huge but be it's one of those airports that's nothing but a luxury mall in the middle like you have to walk past acres of Chanel everybody and I'm like, this crowd doesn't look like the luxury shopping crowd I don't know what you're doing here exactly. And then there are no seats. And seating. I had a four and a half hour layover. I ended up sitting on the floor and for a while because there was just no seating. Very weird. How do you build an airport with no seats. Like, maybe that's how you charge more for the plane. There were there were a couple seats. You want them circulating and buying stuff. Bingo. That's exactly the plot I deduced there is like, Oh, okay, don't let them sit so they have to float into the stores and eventually buy something. And I sat down to have a meal I sat down until I get some food and then I should I should get that seat. Should have just sat there for four hours would have been good by the time I got by the time they assigned me a gate and I walked out to the gate which was a long height. At the gate there was seating and the only plug that I found so I could recharge my devices were thirstily slurping up some electrons. I'm sorry for the long digression but it was a it was a memorable weekend because we got a bunch of funny little things. At some point I'm talking to a guy that really really nice guy in the little suite we have. And he says, Oh, there goes for stopping. So we bolt outside to the long hallway that runs outside all the sweets, we go next door, and there's for stopping being interviewed on stage about 10 feet from me. And so I stopped in of the Red Bull team who won the race by walking away from everybody else. So in the race, which is like 57 laps or something like that, you watch as kind of every every couple minutes. He adds a second to his lead over his teammate, who is in an identical car, and over everybody else who is an inferior cars. Okay, wow. How did they do this. Anyway, who's memorable for many different reasons, including not liking Istanbul's airport. Speaking of a big global multinationals. I have a theory, which might be a conspiracy theory. Excellent, or might not. It starts in an odd place. It starts in mid journey mid journey is one of the best image, you know, I image generators. It's best because it makes beautiful images, like the one behind me actually. So I noticed something funny and it and it popped when well I noticed something funny. I get mid journey to make pretty images is I, is I give it nonsense prompts, like I can also like say you know make a pretty picture blah blah blah. A lot of times I'm just like literally random words and stuff like that. So it's free associating amazingly cool images and then I pick the best ones and do stuff with them. So I seem to have noticed or or it feels to me like a number of the images like like here's a neighborhood market or here's 1950s gas station kind of rusted out or whatever. It seems like over and over a lot of those will have the Coca Cola logo. So the one where I got there was a neighborhood market and it had like three refrigerator cases and Coca Cola Coca Cola Coca Cola and then I had Coca Cola on on a front cash register, you know, the station, unlike if I were Coca Cola, and I were the marketing team for Coca Cola, and I would, and I knew that mid journey was generating millions of images every day. I would like walk over to them with a big bundle of cash and say, could you make the Coca Cola logo pop up like a little bit more than it should. And you know, wouldn't that be a cool thing for for us to do that together, especially if you had these briefcases full of cash. I would totally do that. And so now I wonder if that's what's happening. So, could it also be a reflection that coke has advertised so much in the world that the world is wallpapered with their logo. It, it totally could. And the training set the training set is basically bias toward whoever advertised the most. So this is that this is an unexpected dividend of Coke's insane marketing budget. Or, you know, I haven't noticed the same thing with Red Bull, for instance, right. I would think that I would see Red Bull nowadays more than I would see Coke, but really. Oh, I don't know the history of the canography, you know, I don't know. I mean, I remember like hitchhiking through the Kalahari and there were Coke. Yeah, yeah, yeah, all over the place. Right. I mean, it's just amazing. Go ahead, Stacey. So what stands out most for me, especially after your share, Jerry is if economic inequality is inheld as one of the foremost things to work towards fixing. We don't stand a chance. And I just want to stay last week I was in San Antonio with Kevin's neighborhood economics. It was wonderful. And what I noticed most. And this has to do with really the resonance of the people there. This was a group of people whose agenda is to elevate the people on the bottom that chain that changes everything. I'm not saying every single person in there had that, but the, the, the largest percentage of people were coming in like that, and it changes everything. And, yeah, I just want to let him talk more about it. You know, but I, we need to really focus on the things that we're supporting and make sure that they're moving in that direction, because that absolutely if that doesn't change as well. I love that you went. Go ahead, Pete. If I may, Stacey, when, what are some examples for you of when it changes everything? What are some of the things you think it changes? For example, for example, Jerry gets invited to this wonderful junket. I mean, I can't put words to it. It's just obvious. How do you think focusing on, on the disadvantage? How do you think that? How does that change? Well, it's not about focusing on the disadvantage. It's about coming up with systems that the systems itself are focused on the flow of material goods so that it's less easy to corrupt based on human nature because the system is built to look out for that. Yeah, that's really cool. I mean, I don't know if it's the same thing, but I was thinking that there, there's a very different experience working in a sector with money versus a sector without money. So like my wife spends a lot of time in the healthcare sector. And so her events, you know, are lavish. And, you know, like I'm thinking about regeneration and our events are not lavish. And it's, and it's, there's something about, you know, and I think in economic principles, it's kind of it's first mover advantage or there's a, you know, a stickiness to it or kind of and so like one of the, like in California now, they're trying to use Medicaid money to pay for housing. Right. Which makes a lot of sense, except that means it'll kind of go through the insurance companies. But it makes sense because that's where the money is. And it doesn't make sense because why would you have like the medical system managing housing, you know, but anyway, you just end up with all kinds of weird distortions and stuff so I feel like it's a version another just another lens on this on a similar issue that you're talking about. And this is just one other thing I'll say is at the conference, it was the most of the people they are realized that it's a systems approach. So housing does affect health and health does affect housing, and going back to the lavish, I'm all for lavishness, but it should be forever I mean I believe in abundance. So I'm not against it being lavish. I just want to open up the flow of who gets to experience that. And neighborhood economics seems like they're doing a good job of it. I think they're doing an excellent job of it. And so if I were designing the world. I would be giving them financial support to give away what they have for free. So they don't have to charge people to get their knowledge. That's what I'd like to say that's the shift I'd like to say. So how do we shift. How do we shift funding of stuff so that the thing I just went to which was clearly overfunded get doesn't happen as much and, and the money actually gets shifted to worthwhile local ventures, because there's this like starvation versus Flynn, like, like gluttony kind of problem. I don't have an answer for that and I don't even focus my attention there. I focus on like who we are and who I like, I think I heard through the grapevine that Jordan got some funding. I would say Jordan maybe should look at Kevin and maybe fund him instead of asking Kevin what he could do for him. Anyone else with thoughts on this topic because we've, we've been philosophizing for a bit here. Jose just to catch you up. By the way, Jose, if you wanted to catch up on what we've been talking about. You could just try the AI companion. Just at the bottom of the screen there should be a little thingy that says AI companion you click on that it gives you a window with a couple of prompts, and you could say catch me up on the conversation and see what actually we encourage you to do it and maybe share it with us yet yet another digression but hey, that's worthwhile. We were thinking about this. It's great. Catch me up is really great. It missed your whole analysis of AI though. I think there may be another conspiracy. It's this other AI. It's not me. I'm going to tell you about it. It's a self centered companion, which it talks about the grand prix and it and then they talked about me and then everything about AI has been dropped out of here. Wow. I so I asked, did coke come up and I said coke. I didn't say Coca Cola. Yeah, it actually is. No, doesn't mention coke by name. But it says yes, Coca Cola is mentioned in the meeting transcript participants noticed that many of you asked. It did a great job. Yeah, on my version of catch me up it mentions the Coca Cola logo appearance. So everybody's getting a slightly different version of catch me up to it sounds like. Which, which is one of the things about AI language things, especially you want to have a conversation with it. You don't want to ask it one question. But it's still prioritizing. I mean, it's, it's, you know, it puts things, it puts stuff in my summary. It decides. Yeah. I said, Jerry, my one of my reactions to your framing is it's a scarcity framing. So how do we, how do we shift from money from that sector to the sector. Which maybe so here's harder because funny is funding is sticky. You know, kind of it's like, it's kind of like saying why you know we have an empire that why is Vienna still wealthy looking right well it was wealthy really wealthy ones and it's still kind of wealthy. You know, should we shift that wealth or should we just like grow well somewhere else. Chris. You know, I was going to say, my important query of the AI companion, I ask, were neobooks mentioned in the meeting so far. And the companions as no neobooks were not mentioned in the transfer. Well, that seems like a fortuitous moment to shift our conversation over to the topic at hand, does it not. So it sounds like I haven't missed anything. I'm sorry. Not a, not a job nor a tittle. I don't know where that comes from either but yeah, no. We, we, I reported in on the junk that I just came home from. And then we started talking about mid journey and brands and a bunch of other stuff. Can I, I'm sorry, I just want to say one thing, not to sound narcissistic but I just asked what I said, and it said I didn't say anything. That's concerning to me because I feel like what I said was kind of important. Yeah, and definitely a part of the meeting so far. Well that's weird. Dude, can you ask about the topic you raised and see if it knows that it said Stacy dressed did not provide any specific input or comment in the meeting transcript. Maybe it's just it may be lag. It may take, you know, a few minutes to have what it's the AI companion is working on the transcript and the transcript may be, you know, three, four minutes behind. Okay. Or it's sexist. Well, if it's trained on human interactions. I'm just saying. Yeah. I had another really interesting summarization thing that the meeting summaries, I just process like 10 of them in a row I hadn't been posting things for all of February so I went through all at once and one of the things it does sometimes it will use the full people Peter, Pete Kaminsky said blah. Sometimes it'll say Pete said blah. So I've got a friend in in my calls who's our space J RJ. So it's like our said, the other person is Dr. Claire, you know, whatever. And so it's like Pete and Dr had a great conversation about. Okay. This may point out to why it's important to practice looping and conversations, particularly when marginalized people are at play, so that you can not only supplement and reiterate what they said and make sure they get credit for it but so that the AI fixes its idiotic bias against, you know, writing them out of the conversation the way everyone else seems to. So Pete just shared his summary results from asking the same question Stacy. So weird. Should I ask again and see if it's changed its mind. Actually that summary is great. Good morning. I think it's lag the other thing. It may not. Yeah, I was going to say maybe it doesn't know it's apologizing to me. Apologies for the oversight. That's so good. Yeah, this sounds like chat GPT actually. I wonder if they're running maybe GPT for you. Yeah. So I'm realizing that we haven't been talking about new books all along because what this is telling me is, we should just talk about the books we want to write and then forget about writing the books and just rely on chat interfaces to complete the whole process. So I asked what, what did I say it got completely. It said I said what Jerry said. I got very confused. I'll. I'll start maybe talking about me a books because I was a doctor appointment this morning. That's my tardiness and on the drive home. I was thinking about, because I met with Klaus. And we had a great conversation. He did a bit of analysis. He used to do it. He. The booklet seems to match the audience that we're talking about chat GPT agree with that. We'll also agree with that. We had some good back and forth. And then I was thinking about, you know, how do I reach these folks. Now that we've opened that that Pandora's box like. What, what's, what's a good, if this is a target audience, what's a good way to do it. And so I asked Klaus via email. Thanks for the feedback. What do you think of this and he says, well, I asked chat. And as the chat GPT came up with a long list. So I had the doctor's office. I was reading his long list. And then as I was driving home, I had this thought about. Well, it's recommending do all the stuff that we know, you know, get for younger people get on social media, do all of that for older people do, you know, meetings and co-learning sessions and it's like, wow, okay, that's it's exactly what we what we're embarking on. And then I thought, and then it said, when you're ready to launch the book, do this, this, this and this to launch the book. You know, tell people it's coming tell people they can get engaged get tell people they can, you know, contribute to it blah blah blah blah blah. All good stuff. Then I started thinking, are we so hung up on this book idea. That that we really need to think now that we have chat GPT and other AI that we really need to think of what is this new thing and what are we, what are we publishing for this new audience. Because the new books idea is where capturing people's minds with the idea of a book but it's a new book in a new way that's much more engaging blah blah blah blah blah all all the stuff we reviewed many a time. But I wonder if, because one of the things it said is, there are people that younger folks don't want to read long form they don't want to read, they want video they want audio. And so is there is there another way to frame books that isn't even book that needs to that maybe that what a new books idea is is actually sort of a mid step towards something else. So that occurred to me as I was driving home and I thought, is there, is there that next level that we need to think about as a, possibly where we really want to be. Who say that's really a series of interesting questions. And you made me think of a couple things in the margins. One, we've been really explicit that the book is just bait, but there's a more interesting thing happening under it. And then there's this other conversation we've been having about wall, maybe the chat. You know, how do we hook a GPT up to these ideas anyway and that's sort of a third interface in some weird way. But that when I said, are there three projects here it seems like maybe there are and maybe we don't need all three or maybe we need to think about how to reformulate these for a future world. I kind of refused to think that books are dead, just because everybody's addicted to tick tock scrolls and doom scrolling and super short media. I'm not giving up on either. I'm not giving up on either long form writing or the idea that humans still need to interact and create their own memories, because we could just hand that over to the GPT as well. Right. So I'm not giving up on that one. I'm kind of, I feel like I'm kind of fighting a rear guard action here to get us to a place where we have more thoughtful media that helps us mediate. And how and how what we're going to do about it. So that's kind of where I'm coming into this. And I like that. And then, so I wrote tongue in cheek, you know, we should call these idea orgies, because that's sort of what we're proposing or proposing that ideas need to live and need to be broadly useful and move more than we let them move normally. And maybe calling this idea sex or idea orgies is an attractive way for some people to come in and go, Oh, I want to do that. I'm just joking, but only half joking. Chris, it looks like you were inspired to reach for a book. Yes, I have been reading Dennis Duncan's index. What a great title. A clever and has a clever index in the back to as well as an AI generated index, which is just dreadful. But one of the things he touches on is he doesn't get into the ongoing issue of it. But as people begin indexing things in the early 13th century roughly. One of the criticisms is, and he uses the phrase at the time alphabetical learning. So, yes, we don't need to know anything because we can look it up. And, you know, as of a year ago, going forward, we can just ask the AI. You know, what is this thing. And then either maybe you have some interest in it or you don't. But doing that means we don't have a common as humans, we don't have a commonality of some base level of something we know. So even something as simple as, you know, and you don't notice you miss it until it's totally gone. So, you know, Thursday night appointment TV watching everybody watches friends and then Friday morning you have the water cooler conversation becomes a thing just much harder to do now, where it's much more diffuse or a whole season drops now and you have to watch it all that night. So that you can be in on the conversations, but then you have to do the social dance of did everybody get to episode 10 last night the way I did because they stayed up late. So, how do you create a base of contextual knowledge that becomes a jumping off point for everyone, much less, once you have that, you know, what are the what then are the jumping off points for, you know, everyone else so somebody nerdy like me maybe reading, you know, and it's this has been in my pile for a year and a half two years almost. I'm reading it along with a handful of friends, but no one else in the world maybe interest this book maybe so, you know, 2000 copies, you know, most books don't sell more than 10,000 copies. Most books are down to 1000 because that's how many friends and family they have. And usually, if I remember, based on some Amazon numbers I have seen that average book sells less than 200. The big five publishers and that's usually friends and family buying those copies, and usually it's even much smaller than 100. In the New York Times bestseller list you only have to sell about 5000 copies within a certain window, which means that if you are a politician or someone rich, you write a book and then you buy all those copies through channels that make those numbers show up, right, so that you immediately rocket and then you rely on the coasting factor of you being on the list to keep you on the list for a while and it becomes self selecting. It's incredibly rare that any book sells more than 10,000 and most first unless you're Stephen King or, you know, one of the five big name writers, you don't you wouldn't have a print run more than 10,000. If you're Stephen King you might go 100, 200,000 just to start. And usually they only do that because it's way cheaper to do a massive print run than it is anything else but I, you know, not to get us away from that how do you create the base level of something like and in the early 1900s, Robert Hutchins and Mortimer Adler created the great books of the Western world, essentially as a project of how can we quickly get a huge swath of people, cheap easy copies of books that give us all kind of a base level of who we are as a Western culture, so that we can then continue a conversation from there. I would say broadly their experiment was a massive failure. Aside from a small tiny percentage at the very top to who probably were reading those books to begin with anyway, and he has a good rejoinder. Yeah. Actually, I don't unfortunately Chris. But thank you for all that that data. Super interesting. And now quickly I'm like, Okay, how much money do I have to raise to buy five thousand copies. I actually wanted to reply to Jose and say, Jose, I think you're totally right. I agree. I feel like we've covered that in new books already. And, you know, presumably before you were here so so so I don't feel a lot I don't feel like adding to it much. And then it also makes me wonder if we've not done a good enough job at kind of keeping the new books vision mission values alignment alive that that's not already an obvious thing for the new books crew. I've got it. I've got a different tack. It's been super fun chatting about stuff and even a little bit about new books. Yay. I, I'm still wondering, I kind of forget where we left it I kind of remember and I kind of forget where we left it is new books a project is a process. Does it have leadership how do we make decisions. Why isn't classes book published stuff like that. And I think to that last one I think we, I, what I remember we got stuck on editing resources and I don't mean text copy editing I mean kind of idea editing publish publisher editing. I think if, if we wanted to we, if we had. If we wanted to make his book a best seller we would buy 5000 copies of it before that we would spend some of some of that money on professional editing. If we don't have that kind of money to spend on professional editing maybe the thing that we would do is just figure out how to do that, all of us together. And edit the thing or whatever, or decide that we're not going to decide, you know, what for whatever's anyway I'm interested about the, is this a project is a process. Who's in charge. Are we all in charge. And my notes from that conversation have me have us sort of coming back and saying hey, it's a platform of some sort, and, and maybe something else but it's, it's a platform not a gatekeeper without the platform. And that's kind of where we left the conversation I think last call. I agree. And that doesn't. And I think that's a great place to have gotten to and we didn't finish the conversation, you know what does the platform do. I get that it's not, and it doesn't want to be a gatekeeper but somebody makes decisions, you know, somebody's make decisions about the platform. You know, and, and as a, as a first sample class as a book that he's like done with he's like, okay, do the thing, do the new books thing. Do we decide to do the new books thing that we decide that closet book isn't right to do the new books thing. You know where do we go from here. So I think the gatekeeper thing might have different domains. One of them is most book editors are gatekeepers of content and they have a style and a tone and a level of quality and all that. And I think we've explicitly said hey, we're not a publishing house so we're setting aside that gatekeeper role. And as a platform, there's a different gatekeeper role which is like what the hell does the platform mean what is in the platform what are we building with and we're definitely that I think we're, we're definitely architects of a platform, simple platform but some, which will connect to other platforms like Lulu press or whatever, or Kindle direct publishing but we're definitely I think in we've chosen that path. But we want anybody who wants to author using the Neo bookish idea to figure out themselves how to raise the quality of their manuscript, you know, etc etc we're not we're not kind of in that role this point. So let me stop and pass it to Dave and Stacy. Great because I probably going to try to make you go back over old ground to and I was just looking at the, and I'm not sure I'm looking in the right place but I was looking at the, this wiki description of what is deal books, and it talks about nuggets stuff like that and so. I know I think I'm probably most interested, not so much in the book concept as in the idea spread concept I'm kind of looking at it from a movement making perspective. It's the best tool for kind of getting ideas out into the ether, and hopefully changing people's attitudes and behaviors and stuff I guess is, you know, my mindset, good technocrat. And so the but I see the book then as kind of a tool for that, but, and the Neo books version vision I guess I have is that it's the book plus a whole bunch of a constellation of other related and related things. I'm probably less keen on nuggets kind of growing into something I don't know. Maybe that's useful but so and I actually have a case that I don't know Pete and Jerry have you talked much with Mike Lenin, Michael Lenin, he's, we've been we've been doing a series of economics regenerative economics conversations in the GRC. And Michael was kind of talking about can we do something bookifying of that and I think he's going to come talk to you guys about it. I'm really interested in that notion as well. Kind of what what would regenerative economics. I don't know textbook look like I mean Samuelson kind of broke the industry and made a ton of money with this macro economics textbook and we can, we can do that with regenerative economics replace Samuelson. But, but, but one of the things that it occurs to me is that I can imagine having somebody kind of trying to compile a book. I think that our media environment is so fragmented that books are useful but it's kind of like trying to communicate with people only using email into the work right there there's so many other channels out there that you can't get the people that can't get in the way. So if I really want to have movement making I have to do multiple channels. So I want to create a structure where in people are doing all the channels kind of simultaneously with really roughly similar concept. So I want the book at the same time there's a podcast at the same time there's a newsletter at the same time right. And I don't want to make one person responsible for all of that because it doesn't work that well so I want to kind of use like the GRC to kind of help the help with the different areas of responsibility and things on that kind of process. And I'm, you know, moderately interested in the AI role, you know, it's kind of like so so I don't know if that how well that fits in kind of with the to me it is an AI driven it really is kind of human driven. There's probably with an AI assist, and part of it is a crowd strategy across multiple channels. I don't know. So that's where I've gone. Stacy can I reply to Dave for a moment before going to you. Okay and I'm going to reply to Dave as well. Okay why don't you reply first I can remember what I'm saying. Let me remember. I was just going to say towards what Dave is saying, I would suggest that could the next step not be to invite a couple of people to review classes book. I mean, let's review it let's read it together review it stimulate conversation, but inviting in a couple of people to do it and see what comes out of that. It went through a step like that and I think Dave looked at the manuscript, and I know that Bill Anderson looked at the manuscript. And I think there's a one or two other people who actually looked at classes manuscript. And that turned into some feedback for class. For example, Bill Anderson's recommendation was that this looks like three books. And my take was that it's actually one book but it looks like three books because it's not bound together and it doesn't flow yet as a book with three parts. And we haven't we sort of stall a little bit there so we kind of have to go back to it, but we started that. But that's really not what I'm talking about. Okay, because what I'm talking about is more like people that don't even know class. People coming together to help class do something people that are just as if they had just watched a TV show or just read a book, coming with their own thoughts and things like that more of a social kind of things with where people don't actually maybe they don't even know each other, but they heard from somebody in this group that they might be interested in showing up. Thank you and we took two steps in that direction but not the full walk, which is we set up a sub stack for this project. And the idea was to take pieces chunks nuggets of classes manuscript and send them through the sub stack so that anybody reading the sub stack would then make comments and so forth. And that would be one way of creating comments in the world that would feedback to class what's up by strangers by people who just like find the sub stack that still means somebody needs to find his sub stack. Right, and that's what I just want to say not everybody read sub stack. It's as good as any of the given that we don't have a magazine to publish and that has a big readership. It's as good a route as any for a group like us right now to find people who want to might want to read this class also has a bunch of his peers, whom he could put this in front of and say hey would you go read my sub stack and make comments or whatever. And those would be not people involved in this project that all the people out in the field of the stuff that he's trying to do. And let me go back for a second and address Dave's question before going up. So Dave the, the notion of nuggets is one way to try to address a lot of the things you were just talking about. And I'm not sure that that's clear because as Pete says I'm not sure that the vision of, of Neo books is well expressed yet. And he's the kind of feedback Stacy just talked about, but the nuggetization is in part to allow for or even promote a variety of expressions of the same nugget or same idea so that a nugget would say oh by the way. There's a there's a video that expresses this nugget over here in fact there's five of them by different people in different ways. This nugget has been reused in different places and, and the conversation around this nugget is alive and well, in order to address this idea and its expression in the world. And then the nuggets are meant to be a way to recompose to dissolve the book, and then reconstituted into whatever new media forms we would like to generate. So, a part of the reason I love the notion of nuggets and we also had a couple calls ago a side discussion about his nugget the right term we brainstormed a bunch of other things. I've been sold off of nuggets I feel like nuggets really expresses the kinds of things I, I like about the idea. But then my track record is I come up with, I see ideas but then I don't usually pick the right name for them, but I'm, I'm still like a big fan of nuggets and love like the idea of rolling nuggets up into an og artifact like a book, or hey into new media. And I do think that the exploration of what new media might look like and what an idea or G might look like is exciting and cool. And we haven't done much of that we haven't we sort of haven't gotten far enough down this road maybe to to have that, that conversation in a lively manner that would be a really cool thing to do, because that would be addressing Jose's question of, hey, what's the next thing and shouldn't we be designing the next thing rather than going back to the old thing and building one of those. Then, and again, we're building one of the old ones because it's it's a currency in the culture. He knows what a book is and a book is a doable artifact. And one of the ways of showing how flexible nuggets ours to say, hey, we can do the og thing, but we can also do the new conversation and be part of it, and that that's one of my clear hopes for this project. Pete, go ahead. Thanks. I'm enjoying this, this part of the conversation a lot, even though it feels a little bit more like hard work. You see, I like what you said about introducing people who don't really know class or the ideas or whatever. And to me that I think that I think about sometimes now when I'm doing AI art and I've got lots of amazing cool wonderful pieces to show people is how how to the context in which you can show people stuff that's cool. And in the art world, it's gallery showings. You, you know, you put together 20 pieces that are amazing with the help of a gallery curator. And then you invite invite people over to essentially a cocktail party. You know, where you provide the drinks and the snacks and, and, you know, and the social conviviality opportunity for social conviviality and then people talk about what they're talking about but they also talk about your art and go away with an impression of it. So I in that same sense, you know, it would be really cool to have a gallery showing for Claus's book, including, you know, the cocktail party parts of it, which we can't do. But that's what it made me think of and, you know, that would be awesome. I wanted to talk a little bit about me and new books, or actually before I do that, let me talk a little bit about new books and the rest of the conversations I'm in. We had some great conversations and fellowship of the link and in massive wiki Wednesday about new books, some of the technology behind new books, some of the social process behind what new books is trying to accomplish. So I would like to congratulate or, or, you know, whatever, tell the new books team. Hey, we're making a difference in the world and we're, you know, or we've got a thumb on some part of the world and it's rippling out, which I think is amazing and wonderful. So we're doing the right work, even if I sound a little bit frustrated sometimes when it's not doesn't feel, you know, as firm or as organized as as I wish it it were. I think that's really awesome. I, let's talk about me and new books a little bit. The part of the thing that that's important to me or the things that are important to me that overlap with new books really well is Dave, they've put it really well. I'm interested in helping people change the world I'm interested in helping good ideas spread into the world. I think we've talked here about new books is not necessarily a book it's, you know, that's a brand that we may have trouble with we may get a lot of value out of it's still up in the air. Maybe new books is talking with a chat bot, maybe new books. A lot of it is in a discussion forum, like a discourse forum. I don't know. At, at kind of more scale, I'm interested in those technologies and those social conventions and social discourse and how ideas spread. I'm also, as you all know, I'm interested in, in the tech that supports that kind of thing so making websites, making wikis using massive wiki. And to connect discussion platforms and all that kind of stuff. That's, those are my interests, my main interests. And to the extent that new books and I are working on the same thing. It makes sense for me to be here and to the extent that new books is kind of a little bit more focused in on on whatever it's my focus on. That's kind of less important to me and I feel like I should. I'm starting this this month I'm going to have to read. I'm going to re apportion my time. I need more time to do like massive wiki work and other stuff. And I need fewer meeting fewer hours and meetings. New books is on the candidacy list for, you know, am I, am I, is it important that I'm here. Could I just get caught up in in 10 minutes like Pete, we need this out of massive wiki we need, you need to help us set up a discourse forum, you know, whatever. We need to talk about massive human decentralization whatever. Even though I had a ton of fun. At the beginning of the call talking about not new book stuff. Sometimes I wish this call were half an hour and we got a lot, a lot done in a half an hour and then we went off to do other stuff and maybe this call would have another hour of doing its project work which is awesome. And maybe I would take that hour and do different project work because I've got a bunch of them. One last thing, the, and I, I'm sorry, I'm serializing a bunch of stuff all at once. One last thing, Jerry we had some interesting, the thinking about nuggets has been interesting thinking about nuggets outside of this group, but on behalf of neobooks has been really interesting. Felicia the link I don't know if I could recap it but we had some good thinking over there in the massive wiki meeting. We're focused this month on getting a couple important massive wiki technical features done and with john abbey, one of the massive wiki people. I have saying, we were talking about the transcusion feature that obsidian supports that massive wiki builder doesn't yet and how we're going to make it do that. So that's what massive wiki in the massive wiki community that's what we're thinking about right now transcusion transcusion transcusion transcusion is the ability to put another page inside this page, multiple times actually maybe you have a number of pages. You have a table of contents page, and you. It's called transcluded but it basically means include maybe you include the text from 10 pages, you know, as, as a way of making one long document that you could scan over and get the gist of the book. Maybe you could take that table contents page rearrange it in a different way, and then take those same pages and include them in a different way right and have a different story. John was kept saying Pete so transcusion influence nuggets for new books right now like no. And he said but nuggets pages are nuggets, you know transcusion puts and puts nuggets together. It's nuggets right and I kept saying no. It became really clear to me that I want to make a real distinction between the technical capability of including stuff on a page, and what new books thinks I mean by what new books thinks a nugget mean to my understanding. This goes back to actually Jose talking about his framework for presenting ideas. I think you and I, especially Jerry have kind of skipped over when we talk about nuggets. And it's because of these other conversations I can I can talk about this. I think that we kind of skipped over with nuggets is that to get them to work together. I've seen talked about this and fellowship link to get them to work together they kind of need to fit together well. And, you know, if you have a wiki like a Portland pattern repository wiki for instance, all the wiki pages are about patterns or about something about patterns, and all the wiki pages are written by people are kind of thinking the same way. You can actually like pick any page and stick it with another page and it works together right. A pattern wiki is going to have nuggets that you can just kind of mix and match and that's where we're where we're inspired to see that it actually works in real life. But if you've got a lot of head. So that's a lot of homogeneity in nuggets. If you've got a lot of heterogeneity in nuggets. People from different cultures and times and thinking different thoughts and different cultural backgrounds and different to Jose's point, completely different worldviews. It's not clear to me that you can just mix and match nuggets well right and I'm super inspired by new books and Jerry I think you've got the tail of a good tiger. I'm super inspired by the idea of like how would that actually work, you know, making a song line from from Australia, and, you know, a pattern of repository from Portland, and like, how do you like fit those pieces together and, and I think it's doable. And I think one of the things Jose was trying to say was well if you map each of those into their respective knowledge frameworks and you can say, you know, I, okay I get what this pattern is trying to represent in its knowledge framework because song line is trying to represent in its framework and when we expand them that way then maybe we can put them together in a way that makes sense maybe that's a way to do it. Maybe it's something else maybe we meet in the middle I'm totally making this up. There's a little bit of song line philosophy to the Portland pattern people and a bit of pattern language to the song lines people and they have they come up with a pigeon or even better a creole in the middle, which is, I get it I get that we want to express these two different ideas but we're going to use this creole in the middle. I'm super energized by that and I think it's also a lot harder than we think it is and so that was the conversations where I had last week where when we say nugget I think we need mean something rich and it's evocative into a future that I love. And it's also going to be a bit of a challenge to get there which, which is cool. Excuse me that was a super useful meditation on our process and your relationship to it. Thank you for that. I have a feeling I need to go back and listen to that a couple more times later. And one of the many tools that's out there right now is one that sort of breaks things up into sections like set will sectionize video or audio segment which like I'm wishing for right now because like the manual. I need to wait I need to find the moment when Pete started that that's going to be like a thing. A couple things a I know entirely this is like a pretty ambitious project and we don't are our grasp exceeds our reach by far. So I totally get that I'm hoping we are on the right track and influence things I'm hoping also we discovered that other people have walked this path before, and we can include and enhance their work and sort of bring it in the The next feature that you focus on and massive wiki is super interesting and relevant here because I can easily see nuggets growing into points into narratives that are quirky and specific through the translucent Translusion features so hey, here's something about open books and open book publishing. Hey, here's a nugget that actually explains how Kathleen Fitzgerald used open book publishing. And that would then transport in a couple of things that are merely descriptions of you know this is what open books are this is whatever else it is, then, then. There's this really interesting sort of floating notion in the middle of is the nugget just a marker for a concept or is it a specific instantiation of a concept as explained this way. Which by which I mean, there's, you know rewrite this for a second grader, there's rewrite this for a PhD, you know explain these things in five levels kind of stuff. Is that one nugget explained at five levels and the nugget knows the five levels, and then the nugget knows those five levels written in Russian and Portuguese and Tagalog. And that gets really complicated really really really fast, but it's really really interesting because the nugget might actually sort of be a nexus of ideas, rather than one physical instantiation of a thing. And you might then find. And what's interesting about that is, hey conversations about open books seem to be collecting around here, and it's a rich place where you can a learn how to do an open book learn what it is. And it would be used that the content about what an open book is in your own writings, videoings, whatever it's right that those things would actually work nicely. And I like that a lot. And I don't know that the composability I know that the composability is a challenge like a huge challenge, and I'd love to experiment with it as much as possible. I think that by playing with this will figure out what what its limits are and where it breaks. And I'm eager and like over eager to leave the limitations of book publishing as books and publishing have them today with digital rights management wrapped around them with all the different things that are obstacles and that keep ideas from from having sex and mutating and making their way around the world today, like I really want that to happen. So partly one of my thoughts while traveling home was, I wanted to sort of talk to you Pete and say, Hey, hey, I'm going to be a little bit more project management T about the thing that you and Jordan and I were talking about about how do we encapsulate the remaining funds we have from the early grant and fuel you to write more stuff that makes wiki massive wiki better, so that we can go play with these things. So I really want to do that. And yeah, it's like they like lenses on onto nuggets like like each of the expressions of the nugget might be a facet or a lens or a filter applied to the nugget but the nugget still winds up being like home base for the idea. In some sense, and it's one of many, possibly many home bases because our idea of what open book means might be really different from some other group that says no no no no open books actually means this over here. But the, but the location of those two next I in competition around the idea is interesting in itself to me, because then we can sort of say what do we mean by this and how does it play out. And I wonder a little bit there may be we maybe I've run into this kind of, I see it as a, the two kinds of there's two kinds of people in the world kind of division around dialogue and discussion versus policy making or something that there are people who believe dialogue and discussion is good in and of itself. And to me it's only good if it's applied to a context right so it's only good if it's the movement making thing. So I feel like your nuggets are pure form of idea kind of that these ideas are good kind of and they'll mix and match and have sex and good things will come. Whereas I'm much more kind of I want to be more applied I want to say no no I want my nuggets to reinforce regeneration. And here's how I'm going to and I know that regeneration gets affected by how which perspective people come at it from. And which media they use to which media they customarily use. Right, so I want to manipulate the books in a way to do movement making, which gets more people to pay more attention to ideas that I think are important. And so I want to give them entries to those ideas, which I which I think are you know I mean we've already got like, it's, you know, I think you're doing really interesting stuff here around. Like, like, whatever. What's the blogger guy, the Twitter guy, you know I mean they you know they took they took text, and they made it very small they made it very big they made it you know, like we played with text on these dimensions but you're you're taking the nugget and you're saying well we can do we can do nuggets in multiple champ you know we can do a whole bunch of other media as well as text, and have different formats but it's still kind of in some sense there's a core nugget, which is is the you know the focus of all these different things. I just want that I don't care about the nuggets or say I care about the, the passage through the nugget to the mission. Right, so that's why I was looking for a verby thing. That's what you know there's a flow kind of it's or those are flow or something. So what you just described is a ideal use case of a nuggety architecture, like, perfect. And I know that people who are on a mission to get something done are just looking to get that thing done and aren't thinking about the nuggets that they use along the way. So I'm going to say, hold on, hold on, hold on, in making this argument and saying hey regenerative ag is like super important and here are the 15 benefits of it, you know, carbon capture systems that only like try to shove carbon into the ground, don't help anybody they cost a lot of money, they cause shit to get buried underground, they don't help the world regenerative ag has a lot of the same benefits and it feeds people regenerate and oil helps the watershed blah blah blah it's like that those are nuggets. Every, every blessed one of those is a nugget that should be part of your argument, and I want to catch them as nuggets, so that everybody realizes how powerful this idea is because it's been reused by 500 people for god damn it. And they can, they can add it into their own slide presentation video production book, not book conversation whatever else, in a way that's attractive and useful and interesting because the nugget is now a high a beehive it's basically a little hive spot where people who care about that particular thing have come and made it better. So I'm trying to enhance slow down nugget ties deconstruct but not in a stupid pomo way in kind of a like hey how do we actually make the point that these things are super important, instead of having everybody read 20 books that all say roughly a piece of the same thing. Which they won't do because you can never get them to read the same 20 books I mean that's you know. Exactly, they won't read the books at all. But what you're saying Jerry is you want a github, but for paragraphs, maybe to the length of a chapter. The reason we're using github is we want like a github. And you can then say, I want, I'm going to build a program. And I'm going to pull source from these 20 projects, and then hit one button and it spits out a book. And I'm kind of saying a chapter is too long a chapter should usually contains many nuggets. So the reason I'm saying nuggets roll up into chapters is that the nugget for me is a is a smaller hold on of an idea to borrow Ken Wilbur's terminology. But but then nuggets are composed of nuggets so you know the uber nugget the super nugget the meta nugget is is like a chapter in an argument or something like that but yes. And what you did the analogy is made to rolling up code by choosing a bunch of modules is very much the model I'm working on. If you were going to have a github model that did that with the project level, the top level be just an individual nugget of sentence two sentences a paragraph or two or three at most. And each one would then be that. And then others I'm not sure I'm not following what do you mean. Well, I mean I can, I can write a program that does 8 million things. Often I want to pull little bits of code from other places. So really want the smallest bits to be the big project level. So, you know, I have one project and it's this idea about this one thing. I have a no, you know, I may personally have, you know, or let's use Nicholas lumens 90,000 number, his project list would have 90,000 things in it and you can pick and choose which of his 90,000 ideas you want to pull from to roll up into your book. I think I agree with that I'm not sure I understand exactly everything you mean by it. The top part is saying I want to point at X number of things and use one button to roll them all up. And you're going to have to write ligatures like, like books are not just a sequence of patterns or a sequence of observations or see sequence of ideas books have never I'm reading Ed Catmull's creativity right now, I read it, you know, partly on the way home. It's a really nicely written book about leadership and creativity it's got a lot of stuff in it and boy does it have nuggets they're just like nuggets aplenty, but it also flows very nicely like a book because he's a good writer he had good editors. And I think nuggets don't get in the way of that necessarily but they require extra effort you can't just push a button and roll up a bunch of existing nuggets you actually have to think about them, and how you're going to chain from one to the other. So you might in fact have binding nuggets you could call them glial nuggets because glial cells in the brain are the cells that hold together neurons, and I'm probably badly mixing and mangling metaphors here. It's going to be a real cool name for a company the metaphor manglers and mixers. But you were you're going to have to write some ligatures so that the stuff actually flows and makes sense, like a narrative to get to get to the point of a functional narrative. I really like Chris's question, because I think I wouldn't describe it as a github for nuggets, because in github the things are too chunky they're too big. But it's still it is a hub. And so we are looking for a nugget hub. And then an interesting thing about github is there's a lot of partially machine readable and partially only human readable, layering around, you know, a tool or a library or something like that that says how you apply this library, what it's good for what it's not good you know it's, there's a whole set of issues just about this library and then there's another set of issues about integration with this library and other libraries. So there's a lot of glue stuff that lives in github fuzzy glue stuff around, you know, library even or or an app. I, another, I think another concept that we have Chris is it's, it's more like it nuggets exist in a big wiki. It's like the the uber wiki or something like that. So, you link and transclude and, you know, assemble and reassemble and you have different versions of nuggets have different, you know, versions of their of the page that they're on or something like that. So it's, it's not a wiki quite or it's not just a wiki either that there needs to be more semantic semantic glue stuff around nuggets to probably make them really work well. Maybe, well I'm framing it from things that already exist. Most wikis typically tend to run to the more narrative article side, but you want something a little more like a smallest federated wiki or a fed wiki where it's like here's a card and as much as you can fit on this card that's the thing. So those are transglutable in a wiki like fashion into kind of larger articles or chapters, which are then built up later into playlists of either by outline or into books. And you could kind of subsume it all into what some people would call a digital garden in a sense of, here's a digital garden with all kinds of fun little things floating around. You get to pick and choose which ones to make your own outline and then hit a button, and that then spits out your playlist or your book of whatever that thing is. And you could include things like what level of detail is needed for you personally, right. So, if you're writing about regenerative ag, knowing what soil organic matter is is very likely important. A lot of people in that field already know it there's no reason to include that detail for reader a, but reader B is going to need to know the excursion the little side trip to figure out what soil organic matter is. So that kind of means you could compose a journey or a, or a knowledge garden that would be appropriate for each person or it also just means that there's links that the astute reader ignores because it's just a link over to explain sort of organic matter. I was wondering if there it doesn't make me think that I stuck in a link to a doctor that we've been playing with for a long time about a media alliance for regeneration and it's like the notion is there's a bunch of people producing content around regeneration. And they're, they all have small audiences right and so my my thought was well if we could somehow aggregate all the people that maybe we can aggregate the audience and people can have a bigger audience they would get more we basically get more bang for the media production but but I was wondering maybe there's an even better version which is like you know replace Fox News with nuggets or something and and part of what you're doing is your, your compiling the stories in such a way that they're able to be probably through a I we largely kind of reformulated out into into the right channels for the right people right so one of things you're doing is channel matching, and the other is your, your lens matching right so you're giving people, they understand the way you think you want, you know they need to understand and you give it to them in the media that they need to see it in simultaneously so you design from the bottom up you know we tend to design for for TD or for newspaper or for you know, whatever but what if we designed for consumption. Really, right, I mean so I guess maybe that's my part of my problems I feel like the nugget is still, I don't care about nuggets I care about consumption I can see I care about understanding or we're actually care about behavior right but you know, how do we get to that end of the spectrum a little bit but I don't know yeah it's like you know build immediate you know like you called it a platform but yeah let's make it a platform they could you know something that. And just to reiterate something, then we've gone over a couple times and yeah and neobucks but one of one of the goals is for these nuggets to affect education, science, journalism, policymaking, etc, so that if so I would love there for there to be I would like to propose a soil organic matter tax. So that anybody who depletes soil organic matter on the plot of land they control pays a big tax and anybody who improves soil organic matter on their plot gets that money over to them. This would this would I think tip a lot of people into regenerative ag it would help a whole bunch of different things. It's one policy mechanism so it's from the policy side, but that would have to be based on a whole bunch of things like what do you mean how do we measure it what do we do. And all of those things could be sort of nuggets that a variety of people contribute in to the formulation of this policy proposal. And as a community, scientists journalists policymakers etc could be collaborating to make that thing happen so that by the time there's a bill posted someplace that somebody needs to vote on the underlying materials are all there and the conversations are there, and nobody needs to commission a new white paper on the topic so that deliberative citizen bodies can show up and spend a couple weekends on the issue. And actually, we can do it a different way. And so, in some sense, this is an attempt to create some connective tissue and some conversations and some other things to make that kind of thing happen, which is of course, just as ambitious as all the other parts of this will say please. I like where the conversations been going because I think what I'm started to hear is that we're talking about means ideas as Dave said, insights. And, and that these means would represent nuggets or nuggets would represent means. I still go back to the idea that a meme nugget really needs to be grounded in something from out from an understanding of what it is that we're talking about that absent some grounding. We have millions and billions of them, all of which are just as good as the next because we don't know what it is that they represent. They're just a mean, and you could then say okay well let's sit down and figure out what this whether this meme is good, and I don't know how to do that absent some way of, of having principles way of looking at it, that it isn't just a, you know, oh it feels good, I like that mean, right. But one that actually I can, I can look, look at where does it sit what ground does it sit on and does it make sense. It really fit within that context. To me that type of conversation. And this conversation has led me to think of me a books more as a conversation than a book. That type of conversation where we want to engage in conversations around these nuggets. These memes leads me to start thinking about what we want is an ecosystem of memes. That is that that has the roots to be able to survive within the ecosystem, and that the, the survivability of those means within the ecosystem, both lives at the level of there's sufficient nutrients within the platform within the ecosystem for them to survive, but then there's sufficient interaction with them moving forward. So if I create a meme, and it's not well grounded, will not well planted, then there's the, it doesn't survive, because it's not well planted. But if it's well planted, and it doesn't resonate, no one wants to interact with it. It doesn't survive or maybe it survives, but it never it doesn't flourish. And so I'm wondering if if that metaphor helps you guys at all it's helping me to think about that what we're talking about is possibly creating an ecosystem of something new. And that that's something new needs both to be well rooted, and to be to have the ability to be interacted with. Well, as well. So it's both it's it's it's ability to move from where it was created and expand and have get better rooted over time. Let me take a swing and answering that will say, again, you've got like five different great questions and issues here all together and what you just said. So thank you for that. I don't think you can. I don't know how to have a conversational arena place space that edits away the stuff that is not well founded. You need to have a messy space where people make assertions do whatever and that's the space we have today. It's a it's a messy horrible space. I can see that the framework that you're proposing, Jose, could be used as an analytic tool to look at each stream or each nugget or each piece of an idea and say, hey, this this I can trace back to this this founding set of here's the foundation I see in this in this sentence in this declaration in this, you know, atomic piece of idea. And you could also label a different one as pure propaganda has been disproven over and over again. But eliminating it from the space of conversation is I think unhealthy for everybody. Yeah, I don't think that's what I was just good and I think that in your framework, there's room for nonsense and propaganda, they just fall into that bin of what they're what they're grounded on. Is that right? Yeah, if somebody chooses to ground it on some crazy idea. Yeah, this is great. This is crazy as speculation with absolutely zero foundation. In fact, it's a it's a or I think it is grounded. In fact, it's just some loony fact that that I believe happens to be true. Sounds great. And by the way, there's a whole bunch of things that fall into original into religious beliefs that are acknowledged beliefs of faiths around the world that fall into that big bucket. There's just no grounding whatsoever. In fact, for this thing, but but it is a very strong religious belief that comes out of this and this and this tradition. You could find it, you can find it through to these different places. It just has no basis in like actual it's got a totally different grounded, which which which is a form of grounding. So with that, I, if that makes sense to you, then I think yes, we're looking at the sort of an ecosystem of religious beliefs or ideas, or something else, and fruitful ways to compare notes and for people to understand the belief systems that each of these things are rooted in, and I, and I'm seeing your framework as an as something to apply that a few people can write from, like you, and, and you would then anybody might apply to all writing as an analytic framework that tags up the node. So I might hate you and your framework but you can, if I wrote in public, you could show up and say hey, here's how I mark up Jerry's idea. And I might suffer a lot from your markup because it's like, ooh, this is just total nonsense and hearsay and conspiracy theories. I couldn't do anything about it because I'm trying to speak in the public sphere. Now, the people who are conspiracy theorists are probably going to have their own frameworks, and we'll do competing efforts exactly like this to tag everything up their way, and I'm playing this too far forward perhaps. But if this is an open space within which people's ideas are sort of playing, it's gotta make room for some of this. I don't know how much of this. Anyway, Dave. Yeah, and Jose, you're going to stick another one link back into stuff I've been writing, so forgive me, but I do feel like, oh, wow, this is, you know, because I've been trying to figure out this open infrastructure for regeneration kind of notion. Right. And could we build a stack. And I was like, oh, wow, a Neo Books platform would be my stack, I think, right, in some sense, right. And again, the point of the stack was to support, you know, software so people could make, you know, make decisions or data so they could run it on their software or courses so they could, you know, right. The infrastructure for me is how do you do landscape regeneration, which is all the knowledge and argumentation and, you know, data, whatever it takes to be able to take a big, you know, chunk of land and make it, you know, more biodiverse and better economically, right, or something like that. And I feel like, you know, we could kind of, I could take the Neo Books concept and put it into that same space. The one thing that has come to me from that kind of thinking has been the notion of the open, the open source has to be an ecosystem and ecosystem means it's growing and improving basically. So there's incentives, like the fact that I have open sourced a nugget isn't enough to motivate that nugget getting better. Right. And so somewhere in the system, I think you have to be deliberate about incentives is I guess where I'm going with this. And one of the maybe positive outcomes is that hopefully some of the stupid shit that's built on nothing would die away, you know, just kind of out of disuse. So there's a rough consensus running code component in here I think that gets reinforced, you know, ideally. Yes. And Jerry, I think I agree with the idea of using it as a analytical tool. I actually think that it could actually be a writing tool. I don't know how I would use it as a writing tool. I know that you look referring to it. Okay, bear with me for a second. Yeah, but that you would write something and have the tools say this doesn't have support in this way. But that's how's that different from what I was describing it would be an analytic tool looking at my writing. Right, but not post writing, as you're writing it. Okay, as a writing assistant so I can I can envision going through your framework as if it were a questionnaire and saying yes I believe in this no I don't believe in this I could easily see that and I could see that influencing how I think and how I phrase things and whatever else that that makes sense to me, but I don't understand how to write from it. I could and if it were an assistant if it were a chatbot trained on your framework that said hey Jerry, you might want to rethink what you said here because that would be right. So you might want to think about like connecting a GPT front end to it, and figuring out how that how that works as a writing assistant that's interesting. We fun to think about as a learning assistant to because you can track how people go through the different ads through nuggets I suppose. Yeah, and so do a Facebook thing but like with constructed stuff behind it, you know, here's how people have been successful to get this stuff in the past. I need to get off the lunch folks. It's been around the hour hour and a half it's been fascinating. Thank you for this it's been super helpful. More later. Thanks. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Whoever needed to be here was here was very strange. The magic of the ecosystem.