 you know. Yeah. So it's interesting about it. You know, because like, you know, I'm not past business is singularity. It's like a delta function, man. You know, doesn't have much width. It's like happens. Is it like the eye of the needle thing? I don't know. It's an interesting term. I don't know how to think about it. You know, using other concepts from other domains might not be relevant. We're talking about the singularity briefly because Bill was struck by Doug B's comment in the last Thursday's call that we are now passing through the singularity. I like to say that we've been in it for a while. About a couple thousand years. Couple thousand? Yeah, it's an event horizon. You know, you can't feel it until all of a sudden, you really feel it. Are we going to dematerialize and rematerialize on the other side at some point? Nope. Good. How would you know? I'm happy with the definitive. Nope. No, see. Well, the weird thing is, the weird thing, even now, people don't really have an understanding of what they're living in. We think, I mean, we think the world is hasn't changed much. But you know, there's big things that happen that we can't really see because we're individual humans. And it's going to keep being like that. So 50 years is going to be like, well, we're still just human, right? I'm so glad you didn't trace that. Go ahead. The example I have of this is from John Perry Barlow 20 years ago. So he wrote an essay for Wired Magazine. And it was, he basically talked about his, I think his mom or his grandmother living through, you know, in Montana or something like that, living from the frontier days into the age of airplanes and weird stuff like that, right? So he kind of imagined himself like that. And then he came up with this concept called humanity itself, capital H, capital I. There's a driving force that he feels like humanity has that's separate from individual humans and gives us things like telecommunications and stuff like that. It seems like there's a path where humanity itself is tracking stuff that individual humans don't. So he said it's kind of like individual humans are like mitochondria, you know, human body. You know, mitochondria got sucked into cells, you know, millions of years ago. And mitochondria kind of still do their mitochondrial thing, you know, they're just hanging out and chilling doing their stuff. And they don't realize that a human has got this whole like existence and plans and things like that, that, you know, have nothing to do with mitochondrial desires or needs or wants or anything like that. So I've always been struck by that scale comparison. I think it's a good one. But there have been periods where we have collectively adjusted much faster than you would assume possible. I mean, think about World War II mobilization. Think about the introduction of the iPhone, you know, how fast we have taken to technology advances over the last 30 years, even in our own lifetime. I mean, stuff we take for granted right now, sitting here on a Zoom call would have been science fiction 20 years ago, 10 years ago. And what's that a signal for you? Is it acceleration or humans coping with acceleration or what it what it tells me is that there is a capacity that we may not know how to tap into. There's a there's a positive way of tapping into it. So the advance of technology that's simply attractive and makes things better. Or there is advancement because of a urgent need such as a war, you know, and an existential threat. So, so the thanks for me, the illustration there in World War II is a really good one. Humans couldn't stand and say, let's not have World War II. And they just came off World War One, right? So it's not like they didn't know what was going to happen if they had a World War. But they were, it was inevitable. It was a larger than human and larger than human groups thing that happened. Humans did an interesting job kind of keeping up the pace. But they were powerless to stop what happened. And it was bigger than, you know, anybody could, so climate change is the same thing, right? It's like, you get one person, 100 people, a thousand people, 10,000 people, you can get 100,000 people saying, hey, we don't want climate change. Let's just stop it. Kind of in the same way that we, you know, could have said that about World War II. And that's not enough people. It's not a big enough organism to say, hey, let's change our change the way we do this. While I'm clearly fond of the subject, and we could go on this way for quite a while. I think we're here for this. I think we're here for some NEO books. And I don't think everybody can be here for that long. So why don't we do a little NEO books business? And then should we have the appetite, we can head back into singularitizing or not. Pete, do you want to summarize what the work you and I did on thinking about Ghost versus Substack and setting up a separate account, et cetera, et cetera? Yes, I would love to. Thanks. And if I may, can I take the opportunity to also talk about kind of what NEO books might want to be doing in a larger sense? I would love that. Yeah. So I think NEO books is kind of Jerry's idea, Jerry's promulgation to keep moving forward to have something, a way of expressing, well actually, capturing, collating, collecting information, making a good artifact out of it, but not an artifact like an old book, an artifact like a new book, a NEO book. So into that space of possibility, a few of us, especially Jerry, but a few of the rest of us have talked about what a NEO book is, what it could do, how it might be. So one of the things that we got to was we didn't we didn't have any traction, we didn't know what to do because we weren't doing anything. So we came up with the idea of a, it was called a quick first book. I don't know if it was, ended up being quick and it was much larger and denser and richer, I think, than we thought it would be. But Klaus did most of the work of writing that first book for NEO books. So now we have the opportunity of going, okay, so if we had such a concentration of information and knowledge, what would we, what are the next steps? So coming from the other direction, partly because of the name, partly because Jerry and I have been talking about this stuff for probably decades, you know, I think it's clear that old style books, the way I said it once is books are where information goes to die because it kind of ends up on a shelf and it's hard to access, it's hard to search, it's hard to search a thousand books or 10,000 books all at once. So now we have this thing called the web and it's got its own mass, but there's something in between, you know, there's some kind of concentration like a book and something that's kind of webby and, and graph based and, you know, information space ish and can be searched and things like that. That's where a NEO book lives. It seems to me that we need to honor the name kind of, for me, it's like, it seems like there should be a NEO book team or something like that or teams, maybe there can be a multiple teams doing NEO books. But the NEO book team is kind of in charge of the whole pipeline of stuff, helping the material get collected and written at one end and helping the information get, you know, sorted search retrieved and consumed at the other end. So if the information isn't being consumed and hasn't gone to a publishing process, kind of an editorial process to make it something that makes sense to people, we haven't done our whole job as a NEO book team. And so we're, we're fighting to kind of figure out what the next steps are, emergently kind of, you know, so we're to the point in the pig in the Python is like, we've got a, you know, the beginnings of a published book, we've got the finished of a written book, we've got the beginnings of a published book, what are the next steps. So I'm looking for something that kind of documents and, and illuminates that whole process and, and to see where I can fit in and where other people might fit in. So that's kind of the context for me. One of the things that we identified last week was a good leading edge to that, that process of publication is starting to take pieces of the book, or things about the book, you know, here's a great book about this, you should read it because of these things because of the singularity and climate change or whatever. We should take parts of the book and things about the book and make blog posts out of them, except in 2023, the way you make blog posts is with a new slash old school tool called an email newsletter platform. So an email newsletter platform is like sub-stock or like ghost. So if I'm, if I'm a sub-stock author or a ghost author, the interface to me looks like an old school blog system. I go and write my post. It's got a thing that old school blogs doesn't, don't have, it's also got a subscriber list. So I can go to my subscriber list and I can, usually I can pick, you know, which tiers, the bronze tier only paid for once a month updates. The silver tier gets most of the updates and the gold tier gets every updates and some extra stuff. So implicit in there is also kind of the idea that there's payment that can be associated with being a member of one of these emails, email newsletter platform list things. So when last we spoke, I was talking about the difference between sub-stock and ghost. Sub-stock is kind of the new hotness. It's very popular. It's growing by leaps and bounds. It's an awesome and wonderful tool. It does lots of things like get you more distribution for your content and things like that. Distribution in a sense meaning more eyeballs on your stuff. So one of those, a very small example of this is recently I'm subscribed to, I don't know, I'm like a dozen sub-stocks or something like that. One of them said, hey Pete, there's a bit of a technical detail here which I'm going to have to go into a little bit. It said, hey Pete, we've noticed you haven't been opening your emails from this list. And if you want to keep getting it, we don't want to like bug you or anything like that. So if you want to keep getting it, click here and tell us that you're still interested in them. Turns out the reason that they can't tell if I open my emails is because I don't, I never, I have my email system set up to never load images. Loading images is the way that web bugs tell the person who sent the email that you've actually opened it. So I don't like that. And so I have it turned off. Most, some people do that, most people don't. So anyway, it said, you know, hey, you should like, come click on this, go to the sub-stock, tell us you're still interested in this newsletter, everything will be wonderful. And I was still interested, so I did click the thing and said, great, you know, you're re-subscribed to this email list, you'll keep getting it, even if you're not opening it for whatever reason. So right then, they said the author of that newsletter also likes these other newsletters, this one, this one, this one, this one. They have little checkboxes next to them. There's a select all button. And below that it says subscribe for free. So that's a classic sub-stock thing. And they do these interactions all over their product where they've got, they've got you by the lapels because you're reading their stuff. And they say, here, here is even more stuff, except that the way they do it is very, very clean. It doesn't feel smarmy. It feels like I'm getting something. They're giving me something. It's just wonderful. So that's the good news about sub-stock. The bad news is they're using all of that engagement stuff in the way that, to use a really dirty name, in the way that Facebook does, to get more, more people using their platform. They don't care so much if I'm getting value out of it. They care a lot more that they're getting value out of it. So I went through, sorry for all the detail on sub-stock, but it's, I think it's a good example of their, their engagement stuff. It's a, it's a win for me in that I get more information and content that I love. It's a win for them that they get me deeper involved in their platform and they can end up monetizing my eyeballs better for their, their customers. So make no mistake, sub-stock is not in the content distribution business. They're in the eyeball aggregation business on behalf of their, their people. So sub-stock is, you know, it's, it's one of the, the kind of forces that we, that we rail against a little bit. They, they're doing concentration. They're doing commercialization. They're doing a little bit of, of capture and hold. It's, it feels a lot better than Facebook. I don't know if it is or not. So then they've got a competitor, Ghost. Ghost has got a very similar product in, in some ways it's actually better. Ghost does a really lousy job of doing that cross promotion. It, it doesn't do the same kind of, they're, they're not in it for the, they're, they're actually in it. Their ghost customers are the people paying them 10 bucks a month to host a ghost site and that's who they serve. So they, they serve the authors. They don't serve a business that's trying to make as much money as they can. So Ghost is cuter and, and their business model is simpler and they're not so rapacious. They're not, they're, they're not whatever, kind of the, the, I'm going to say Silicon Valley assholes. I don't know if the sub-stock people are Silicon Valley or New York or what. They're probably neither, but they're, they're capitalists. Ghost are not, they're, obviously they're, they're in a capitalist system, but they're much less so. They care a lot more about community. They care a lot more about open source. I have free ghost account and a, sorry, I, I self-hosted Ghost instance and I also have a ghost account where I pay the money. They're happy that I'm using their software for free and everything is wonderful. So, Jerry and I kind of went through this probably in less detail on Friday. Um, and I was arguing hard that I wish we didn't have to sign up with sub-stack. Sub-stack seems like the right choice because they, they're going to get us more eyeballs, which is what we kind of want for new books. Even in spite of the fact that they're kind of counter, counter, counter brand, they're off message for us. Where we came to was that neither ghost nor sub-stack is really the right architecture for this. And several of us have been thinking about a better email newsletter architecture. It's actually kind of, you could take massive wiki if you bolted on email sending and maybe a few more things. You'd actually get a real nice newsletter platform, like ghost or like sub-stack, but with better features and even more of a community oriented thing. So, Jerry and I decided that's where we want to go. We'll write up that architectural vision. We'll work towards that as the new books team. And in the meantime, we're just going to sign up with sub-stack and bite the bullet and get eyeballs. Another, another significant component of this is the entry business model for ghost and sub-stack. Ghost has made a terrible mistake where if I want to use ghost, pretty much I have to pay them 10 bucks a month between 9 and 11. If I want to use sub-stack, sub-stack is rich and fat already, so they don't need my money up front. They're totally happy for me to engage however long it takes for me to decide that I'm going to drive revenue through them, and then they're going to take a 10% cut. So, for us who don't have a lot of money lying around for this project, sub-stack is like a clear and easy winner for the first six months a year, two years, something like that. Ghost is a much harder sell. Somebody's going to have to fork up 10 bucks a month. So, I'm sorry to say that's another component of the decision to go with sub-stack, to begin with. Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. To build on Pete's description and connect it back to Neo Books a bit, the reason we were inspired to go do a sub-stack or a ghost or some kind of newsletter, which has sort of replaced blogging, that's a different conversation, but it seems like blogs now kind of live on sub-stack in the general public's mind, was that we could find a way to get crowdsourced critiques of nuggets of content that are going into Neo Books by posting them as if they were blog posts or newsletter episodes through the sub-stack. And we might actually do that intermingling the different books. So, let's say that there's four authors working Neo Books through the system. I think I mentioned that it would be great if the header to our sub-stack part explained this and said, for more details just go read this post over here, but that each post would say this is for this Neo Book over here and this is working chapter two or whatever like and have a go with it. But, Klaus, that would give you published nuggets that you could forward to anybody, point to anybody, they would look pretty good, they would look like a good blog post. And I think that one of the things that's really struck me is that as we've gone through the process of you and Chachi BT collaborating on writing this book, you've been really happy because a lot of the pieces that come out of that interplay are useful to you in your interactions with other people whom you're trying to like influence or share knowledge with or whatever else. Does that make sense? Makes sense, yeah. Yeah, I mean, I would have to become familiar with the technology, obviously, but it sounds pretty straight up. So, I think what this means is we end up creating a new sub-stack account that has share, where we share the ID and password. And I think that's pretty doable. I don't know whether sub-stack is would be mad if we were using the, you know, the same account on three different machines concurrently. I don't know if it notices or cares. Should be fine. Okay. And then we would each learn to compose a post or a newsletter and probably confer with each other and in the Nia Books channel and say, hey, I'm about to send out a chapter, you know, all clear and go for it that way. And we'll just figure out our protocol about what that all looks like. And I'm happy to write up a little short checklist that includes reminders of how to use sub-stack. I think we'll need a little bit of instruction thing. Damn you, Sonoma. And also, well, I like this one. This is my favorite of all the hand gestures. You're getting really fancy. The laser light show rocks, man. But that would have tips on how to use sub-stack. And then also, hey, did you put a header on that says this is this book? Did you this? Did you this? And if we can sort of make sure we've checked those items, we're kind of good to go. Other thoughts, questions? I think that's all the explanation we need to write this second to cover sub-stack. I think there's still another really interesting conversation about the future of massive wiki relative to Nia Books, relative to how the world looks at information, et cetera, et cetera. We don't need to have that conversation right now, but that's a conversation I'm excited about and want to create some media around like with Pete and anybody else who wants to. Well, thank you for doing all that research here and getting us more forward. I've got a wish, and we could maybe keep it for later in the call or something like that. So if people want to drop off, they can. I've got a wish that we actually get the sub-stack up and going on this call so that it's done. Right. And at least with a few people, especially you and me, Jerry, to answer the right questions and things like that. By the way, a sub-stack can have team members. Oh, good. So we don't need to share the account. Oh, that's really interesting. Okay. So we don't need to share ID and password. We just each need to have a log into it. Yes. That makes total sense because so many people write multi-party web logs, basically, or multi-party newsletters using it. So that makes total sense. Thank you. I have not been behind the curtain on sub-stack yet. And you can, and well, not that this, you can either be known to the public or not known. You can be public staff or secret staff, and then you can have different roles. Admin contributor, by the way. That's awesome. If I could just chime in here briefly because I have to go at the top of the hour. But I've been using sub-stack anyway. And I want to share something here which I've been playing around with. I've shared Jerry's, some of his materials, which he's, we can talk some other time about your opinion about it. But the idea behind it is to actually engage people in the first part of a blog post, finding a question that they feel that they would like to speak to. But the second part actually is elisting people's personal stories about what their own personal experiences have been of inequities. It goes into more detail there. But I've already just started doing a monthly Zoom call on this where I interview people. But I have a conversation beforehand to set it up. There's a methodology for setting up. I have an interview that goes on for maybe 20 minutes, 25 minutes, and then there's a generative dialogue about the story that was told by the person. So it's a very personalized approach, and it gets into your own family of origin, personal professional origin of story, whatever experience that you have that you would like to share about how you've experienced some inequity and how you managed to work around it. So anyway, conversation to be continued. Hopefully I'll be here next week to chat, and I'll see if I can watch the end part of this conversation to find out where it's developing. But last time I was here two weeks ago, I really appreciated the idea of something being a living book that's iterative, dynamic, and engages people and the story. And you rewrite your story, et cetera, et cetera. It's how do you create that sort of learning milieu that we so sorely need. Anyway, that's me off my soapbox. Love that. Thanks, Rick. All righty. Okay, take care now. All right, what else should we talk about before putting on the leather apron and pulling out the ads and the shapers? I think what are the next steps with Klaus's book? Bill's had a pretty good read over it. I've had less of a good read over it, I guess. And we could push it out the door as it is, or we could do other work on it. And so I guess putting that in the context of who's doing it, where, when, how, for how much. I think we haven't had a tour of does this smell like a book and what would make it feel like a book. So I think that Bill's comments and maybe there were four people who volunteered. And I have not been in good touch with all of them. So I need to say, has anybody else got any thoughts or opinions and offer them a way to feed those back in? But I think not an exhaustive round of everything, but clearly what would it take to make this into more of a book? It's kind of useful right now. And then Klaus, I think maybe since we're setting up the Substack now, maybe the next step is to choose which chapter or nugget. It doesn't have to be a full chapter. It can be any piece of it to start publishing through Substack as a test drive. And then see what attention we can kick up with that. Because I think once you publish it, we can all retweet it. I can't say retweet anymore because I haven't touched Twitter for a long time. And I don't know. My soul hurts because I don't have the old medium I used to have. Hey, Stuart, good to see you. Stuart, you look different. There is something new about you. My hair is like that. That's all. Yeah, right. Yeah. Konda's hair is like that today, sir. That's all. That's it. We just had a really nice conversation about Substack and a bunch of other stuff. And Pete is ready to go set up a Substack for us. I don't remember if you were in part of the call previously here about how we might use it. But the idea is that writers of Neo Books might post some of their nuggets through the Substack as blog posts or newsletter episodes, which are sort of interchangeable terms or parts these days. I guess. And then we'll see if we can drum up some attention for those posts as a way of crowdsourcing some editing and feedback and also previewing and building attention for a Neo Book. And, you know, those posts could also have a link in the footer or whatever that says, hey, this is a Neo Book. Here's where to go find out what a Neo Book means. I would love to hear from Bill what your observations are. Okay. I was here for that hadn't been solidified yet. But what's interesting to me is that, and I still keep it close, but very early on when blogging and tweeting surfaced one of the early activists in that arena actually took my first book and annotated it, half of it, blog, tweet, blog, tweet, blog, tweet. So, you know, what I just really want to do is kind of validate that if you write something of value, there are tons and tons of nuggets in there. Tons and tons of nuggets. Cool, which book do they do that to? Getting to Resolution. Cool. Yeah, I mean, I still have all of the door dogged pages and the tweets and the blogs and every once in a while, I'll get a little enthusiastic and I'll start posting stuff. Yeah. So, it's a great idea and appreciate that. Other thoughts, questions? Bill's reactions. Oh, Bill, do you want to dive in? I mean, that's going to maybe eat the rest of our time on the call, I think. No, I don't think so. I'm well, it could, but I don't think so. So first, it's pretty impressive what you put together, I have to say. Klaus, I was really like, ooh, all righty. So I basically looked through the main big pieces. I didn't read all of the chat GPT generated text that you did. I just skimmed through much of it to just see the main topics. I did a deep dive for myself on my Spiral Dynamics since it was somewhat new to me. It took me way back into psychoanalysis and work groups, which is pretty interesting. And Theory U, which I just knew a little bit of, and I looked at that more. And I had a conversation with Pete, but what it seems to me, what you put together so far, to me, is like three books. There's this story of soil, the soil focus kind of context here. Let's talk about things this way. And with the water cycles, and there's an ongoing, because I've looked into it a little bit, there's some ongoing back and forth about water cycles, climate models, what's taken into account, what's taken into account how the models actually work in terms of how they divide up the atmosphere. It can get complicated in that atmospheric chemistry world, which I have a little background in. And then there's the piece about Spiral Dynamics and understanding how one can use that to enable communication, which I think was how you present it. It was like, here it is. And if we want to try and have better conversations, maybe we could identify some of our, how we walk in the room and use that to maybe be better at trying to, rather than just saying there's something over a louder to people who aren't listening that way. And then the theory you think I think is very interesting, I will say, as a former practicing Zen Buddhist, the whole presencing thing is kind of, I liked it. So there is like three pieces there. And so for me, I think they're all kind of important, but they have three different aims. So when you put this all together as a story of soil, I was a little confused like, what is this collection for? Whom do you see actually using it? And in what way? And I saw myself, I mean, I got a lot out of reading this lovely thing. I'd like to know more about Spiral Dynamics. Let me go, but that's partly me. I mean, I'm willing to spend the time to do that. Anyway, so I saw that, that's how I took away the first big piece I saw. So if this was going to be put together as a Neil book, it might be, you know, we put together the first triad, you know, so like, you know, Star Wars, the first three movies are about blah. And here we go. And that somehow set a context for this information. We need to communicate with people. We all communicate differently. We often disagree. We often don't listen. You know, and then there is this, you know, this theory about how do we come from wherever we are to get to some place that might be different in a productive way. Right? I mean, so that's how I see that. There's three things, not just one. And I think they're all important. And I have a little bit of my own concern because I looked into some of the climate science recently, this recent, there's a recent summary about how the whole temperature thing is, well, there was a scientist who wrote this sort of general summary and saying, well, it's not all about thermodynamics. It's about other kinds of dynamics, you know. Thermodynamicists, they said, yeah, you're not helping us. What are we talking about? I mean, if I'm just an ordinary citizen, okay, we saw the word dynamics twice, but it's different, you know. So in a way, what you said, it was overly complicated. You know, it could be like, Pete's brought this up, but it could be a matter of scale because, you know, we're not going to say, you know, we could say like thermodynamics is about, you know, it's about heat and the movement of heat. There are other things happening in addition. Heat doesn't, you know, and you don't want to be reductive, right? Because, you know, in the end, it's just, you know, heat is the, you know, describes everything in the universe. It's like, well, when we're done talking, we might as well, you know, there's nothing to do with that information at that level. Anyway, so I don't know how, so I think the panther on is really generative for me, and I just, I mean, that was my response as to what I looked at. A question for you, Bill, before we go to class. Are you saying, A, these are three different books that are kind of unrelated. B, I could see how this could be a book, but it isn't tied together to be a book yet, or E, or C, something entirely different. Because I think that's, I think it's B&A. It is a book because Klaus declared it to be here, three things together, and they are related in the way he's sort of organized it. I think it needs a better context for just an ordinary reader who hasn't, who just stumbles on it to see, what am I getting into here? Right, and I see they are connected because I mean, when I listen to Klaus, I mean, not only is there all this information about, you know, like the generative agriculture and trying to actually, you know, find a way to live more productively on the planet rather than destructively, and then we do have communication problems big time. And also, it's not clear that, it's not clear we, we don't, well this, we don't necessarily agree on how to go about getting from a confused mess into a productive action. And I think the theory you think tries to take some of, represent something about that as a way to, you know, for me, it's like, oh, here's a way to think about it, and maybe you could use this in your own behaviors or others. And move, you know, take some, take some steps that are positive. So I look at it as being, it needs just a little, I guess if I were the reader, I would say, here's Klaus, here's, you know, here's one way to read this, this, this book that has these three sections, you know, and Klaus is saying, here's how I tie them together. Here is I think an effective, yeah, I've read books like this, the author says, this is a, you know, this is one way to read my book. And I don't think it's, that's perfectly good information for the reader, because they're just looking at words and punctuation and trying to make sense out of it. Klaus, your thoughts? Yeah, so the, the logic that I was trying to apply here is, first of all, to bring attention to the importance of soil, the historic context, you know, where soil has maintained and ended civilizations throughout our history, the importance of soil in relation to water, you know, the, the hydrologic cycle that I didn't even know what that word was, six months ago, and, and so, and so how, how all that is linked together and how we need to really farm, not to sequester carbon, which has sort of become a theme, but to restore the soil microbiome back to health. So there is this one chapter that puts in a historic perspective, the amazing importance of soil as, as the foundation of life, and, and the impact of the soil-water connection to, to climate change. And in the process we discovered that most climate models missed the hydrologic cycle, you know, and, and, and completely underestimated the impact that water has, you know, on, on the acceleration of climate, of a changing climate. The second part is where I wanted to use spiral dynamics to explain that people have different capacities to listen. So, so for example, right now we have Mike Johnson just became Speaker of the House, the guy's bright blue, right? In the blue spectrum, you can't explain science because God is in charge, right? I mean, you, you, you talk to someone in the blue spectrum about, you know, we are losing the battle, maintaining a functioning biosphere, and that just doesn't resonate at all because it's, it's, it's a thing for, for the gods. And then in the red spectrum, it's even worse, you know, that's where the Trump lives. And so, so then you have the orange spectrum where it's all about business and, you know, how much money can I make here and then the green spectrum and so I wanted to explain that people listen differently based on their, first of all, capacity of their, of their consciousness, you know, the, the, so that you have to tailor messages to, to the, to be audience specific. And then the third part, the, the power of CREU is that we identify a problem and we start debating solutions. That's the typical response, right? When you, when you suggest an idea to, to, to someone, they will instantly know that this can't be done because or have a solution and so on. So CREU is really a process structure. It's a, it's a social systems project management tool, you know, where you help people to get through, you know, the iceberg model to go through a process of exploration, aligning of understanding and, and, and knowing until reach, until we reach a collective state of presencing where we're all on the same page. We got it. We understand, you know, what the issues are, what needs to be fixed. And we also have an idea of where we want to go, but what, what the, what the desired outcome is. And then from there, you move into a phase of crystallization, you know, pulling the information really tightly together and then experimentation, which is referred to as prototyping. So in this fourth episode now, where I'm starting volume two, that's where I'm focusing on learning from the future as it wants to emerge. Because we can't, we can't determine an outcome in any fixed way. What CREU actually proposes, what Odoshama is proposing is don't define an outcome by more than 50, 60%. You know, you have an idea of where we need to go, what we need to achieve, but you don't know yet the obstacle course that you have to get through in order to reach that. So you define a desired outcome to the point where it has structure. It has meaning. It's generally understood, but then the path is an exploration as you move through the way forward. So that's where I'm, where I'm at now, with this volume two. So hopefully that makes sense to connect the story. Pete, please. I'm loving this conversation, by the way. I have, I have kind of, I don't mean this to be a provocative question, but I wonder if it will be provocative. What kind of readership are we looking for for Klaus's book? So in the first month, are we happy with one reader, 20 readers, 1,000 readers? And like maybe after a year, how many people do we hope, hope we'll have read this? It's a hard book to read. You know, you have to, I mean, you have to have a a certain mindset before you can even get into it. And even then it's not easy to digest, which is why we're talking about taking nuggets out of it. So a possible way of answering it. Nobody from a particular tier of the spiral dynamics model. So like orange people aren't going to go, Oh, here's the book for me. I need to read this. This book is a meta book, because it's about how to communicate with people at all different levels about this big thorny problem. So maybe the audience for this book is narrow and specific about change makers who understand systems thinking and some degree of spiral dynamics or are willing to listen to interesting approaches to how to solve those problems. And maybe we need to define the, that group of people narrowly and then find them when the book is done, go out and actually like locate a bunch of them and say, Hey, could you pass this to all your friends? However, that works, because the book as currently set is not a general readership publication. It's not even like the dawn of everything, a thorny read for people who want to fix the world. It's sort of not that either because it because it goes so specifically into particular methodologies, which is terrific. Like books sometimes are very focused. But class, I think what Pete is asking you to do is, could you just put some walls around or some a little bit of fencing around who those people are who realistically would like to read this whole book? There's a bunch of other people who will read the blog posts and forward them and like them. But if this is to be treated as a book, who do you think is going to read the whole book and find it useful? David, maybe you can help me out here. Is this a book that would resonate within the GRC community? I haven't read, what I did was kind of, and I'm sorry to come in late, I kind of, the first thing I did was took the book and created a table of contents and I couldn't follow the table of contents. And that to me was kind of a test of the coherence of the book. So it sounds like you've been explaining the bits that I needed explained. So I'm sorry I missed that. Am I, you know, the GRC people, there might be some, I mean, so one thing, I've been working with a friend of mine who's put out a book on how to do, how boomers should deal with climate change. So you can look it up on Amazon, Lawrence McDonald, he's a really good writer. His table of contents is really good, by the way. So I think it might be worth just looking at his table of contents to get a feel for it, because he kind of gives the chapter title and then he gives the actions, title actions, title actions, it's all that on one page. But he's talking about, he's got a real publisher. He's like dreaming that he can get 10,000 people to read the book. So I can't, and I assume hundreds is much more the accepted norm for a published book. And so anyway, I just think our expectations of book is probably way overblown. I wondered if this book could be a textbook, but then you would need a course, right? If you were teaching the book in a tech, in a course, that might make a lot of sense. And of course, you can always force your students to buy the book. Thanks for the idea of the wall, Jerry. I actually, I don't have a expectation. It may be that Klaus got, you know, for the whole planet, Klaus got what he needed out of just writing the book and structuring his ideas. And now I think this is a beautiful thing, not a weird thing, but, and now maybe it'll be like a whale carcass on the bottom of the ocean, you know, enriching a whole ecosystem of plants and animals and people feeding off of that. Um, maybe that's good enough. I, or, you know, or if, if we wanted, you know, 10,000, like they've, they've, they've said 10,000 is a lot when you're talking about a book, if you wanted 10,000 people to read or at least be exposed to the top three ideas out of it, you know, that's something that you could drive for. You could say, okay, let's, you know, let's make that table of contents and then make a little summary thing and then pick the top three things and then blast those out over X and, you know, whatever else, Instagram and Tik Tok and whatever. And you would get 10,000 people to see the top three things for this book, you know, and you might get one or two people to actually read more of it. And so that's a different way, a completely different way to do it, right? Um, just, you know, just kind of wonder what, what we care to aim for, what we're happy with, what we, what we would be happy with in a year. And then, you know, let's work on that, whatever it is. And I don't care too much what it is. And I'm not hell bent to turn this into a book, book that goes to Kindle director, whatever and all that. I want to do that with one of the Neo books that's sort of in the Q, that'd be great, because don't, don't feel like my life will be saddened and I will be disappointed if that doesn't happen. I'm interested in this doing the best work for you and for the movement and for helping humans that it can, the way Pete just described. So I'm good for that. I think we should explore what the sort of different angles and methods are. And also it feels like every Rev we do where we try to do something like we're doing right now, we get some clarity that we didn't have like before the call and that's, I think that's good for what we're up to as well. Stuart. Yeah, a few, just a few somewhat disjointed thoughts. To speak to the somewhat disjointed conversation, although it is, it is a congruent whole. But I have some vague recollection that, that the point that Bill raised about not being sure where we were, and that Klaus then did an exposition on to explain. I think I suggested something like that as being needed at the beginning of the book to provide context, that that was kind of missing as a piece of wilderness guidance. That's one piece. Second piece, you know, when David started talking about table of contents, table of contents is a marketing document. No, if sans are much about it, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a marketing document. I love the idea or the image of the quote book being a carcass at the bottom of the ocean that maybe grabs a certain number of people. And yeah, when you're first doing a book, I think, you know, you need to do it because it's something that you feel compelled to say, I need to get this out there. You know, I, I see it as a congruent, maybe because I've been part of the developmental process, I see it as a congruent whole that, yeah, it's got three different parts, but they hang, they hang together well. And maybe it just needed that context, you know, from Klaus so that a reader would have a framework in which to put the pieces in. And in terms of number, in terms of audience, okay, that is a question, you know, usually asked of a, of an author, what's the audience for the book? And obviously the book isn't for everyone. It's got a, you know, but, but perhaps it's for more people than we, than we realize, because it's one of the key pieces of a major, you know, planetary issue that needs to be addressed. And the more people who might educate themselves about this, you know, here's, here's a, here's someone who has studied it, here's an overview. Here's a way of looking at it. Here's a way of reaching different audiences. Yeah. One thing that strikes me real quick is how tiny book audiences are. Like when you compare a reasonably popular podcast or a blog post that goes a little bit viral, or what have you in modern media, the number of humans whose brains are affected by those things is like really big, giant, compared to 10,000 people, you know, most books don't get more than 10,000 sales. The vast majority of American books published do not make it beyond 10,000 people who purchase the book. And of those, God only knows how many of them actually read the book. Well, it's, it's very few. Okay. It's, it's, it's very, it's very few. Most books that are purchased are not read. I can make that statement. Okay. Okay. Yeah. And unfortunately, I need to, I need to, I need to jump off. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for being here, Stuart. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Is that a sub stack? Sub stack. Hey, I think that was a really good, good place to go. And sub stack is a good pallet cleanser after that as well. I just have one thing to add. I think one thing that needs to happen with the, so for me as reading it that struck out, because maybe how I read is that there needs to be some copy editing on what the work you've already done with the conversations on chance and PT. And when I read it, and when you make, you make a very strong claim about what several claims about what we really need to focus on and hear you. Here's how to do it. But in the part about the early parts there, I as a reader really wanted some citations. And there aren't any. So, so there's just something that needs to be done with some of the material I feel. Make you all may have different, you know, want something else, but so to get observation. It may be time to use questy. So a very old and dear friend of pizza in mine, Dave Sifri, who started technology back in the day and did a bunch of other stuff has started a little company called questy.ai, which offers citations and fact checks itself before coughing things over to you. And could in fact aid in your journey in your quest to have more backup for what you're saying. Although I think it sites to websites probably and not scientific journals, although next time we talk to Dave, that would be a good in a way, anything would be useful as a reader. If I see a strong claim, which is copies that claim, not just, you know, here's what these paragraphs say. I mean, I would like to see how to see what's the basis for making that kind of a claim. And their husband, because class hasn't just been dreaming, he's been reading, he's been doing all kinds of work. So there was a reason, you know, it came from somewhere, even if you did generate it, there's still something that you learn from. So I think some of that. It's not all that difficult. I mean, the dawn of everything comes to mind, right? Because I'm using a lot of that information. And that's perfect. Just, you know, dawn of everything, you know, addition and page number or whatever. Fine. Somebody can go find that. Right. And probably get it from a public library, because there seems to be plenty of them that have bought it. So I think that that would be helpful. And I would just say, as a retired chemist, your claim that the climate models, there's this big break between the climate models and what's going on with water and soil. It's somewhat more nuanced, because I've been reading some in my atmosphere chemistry books and some other places. It's like, I can see how that statement is true. And I can also see how it's not like they don't, you know, know about it. And the whole issue with water in air and stuff is like just, it also is a confusing thing. It's complicated. Just claim it. It's very complicated as a physical system. In the physical sciences, it's a complicated. And I even look back on the papers that were showed up in the OGM one from this Russian woman who was talking about how, you know, there could be a lot more cooling and just has to do with water and well, climate people are pretty aware of those effects. So it's interesting that, you know, it's, it's, I think it's there's a strong claim to be made that it's possible that looking at things, the way you're looking at it in terms of soil and the health of interaction of water, there is certainly a piece about, well, we can just sequester the carbon, you know, we'll just plant mushrooms. It'll all be good. It's like, no, here in Texas, we're going to build gas generators. And so, sorry, I don't think your mushrooms are going to help that much. We need something else. Not, not, not, but not to say that there is this other piece about the soil, which I just came across. I'm reading a history of how economics actually became something different from natural philosophy. And in the early enlightenment stuff, people were very aware that the only real wealth came from the earth before. So it's really, this is an idea that, you know, has been transmogrified in a kind of system we live in now. But it has also been, it was also well understood in some other ways, you know, a couple hundred years ago. Bill, you're opening a bunch of really interesting questions, some of which could get like really thorny and become these sort of downward looping spiraling, but we'll never figure this out. It's so complicated. And I think sometimes people have a perspective on a system where they see a lever or they see something that's really sticks out and makes a lot of sense that other people haven't seen as much. And this feels like kind of the territory we're in. It's like, Hey, this is over here. And Klaus, when you're making assertions like, Hey, the climate, none of the climate analysts have seen the small water cycle, you better have some, some like reason to say that that's a really true thing, or modify the statement to say that the role of the small water cycle is underappreciated or something like that. And when you leave the absolutes and enter the land of, Hey, here's, here's what we think is going on. Or if you have a huge authority whom you're quoting, and you want to point us to a webcast or a podcast interview of that person where they claim where like they're clearly an authority in the field and they claim it use that as evidence in the book rock on then. But you need to be cautious about claims like that. And then also, this morning, my new more conservative than me friend sent me an article about star plastic straws versus paper straws, how complicated that issue is. And I was like, oh geez. And really, I had I had a total Midwestern, oh geez kind of response to it. In the sense of all these issues will easily devolve into that. And yet, if we use, I'm sure it's not Occam's razor, but I don't think it's Hanlon's razor. Like, let the simplest thing kind of cut through. I think that is Occam's razor. The simplest the simplest explanation is probably the right one. Is that Occam's razor? More or less, more or less. But if we can sort of find find our way to making strong claims that are backable in some way, then the Neo book format becomes a way to explore the nuances, the vagaries, the dilemmas, the everything else, but only if you set yourself up to jump into those things credibly at the beginning. But that's actually the only thing that I that I highlighted. So and I tried to transfer it over. But when you go into the document, and you then you click on there are indications. When you click on indications, then you get a search result that shows a bunch of articles talking about this this globally coherent water cycle response. And the statement I'm making here that climate models seem to have missed the importance of the small water cycle. So there's actually numerous articles on the on the on the web that are that are linking to that. But anyway, I get the point of putting references out there. Well, all of which has taken us away from building a substack instance that Pete was going to take us into. Shall we do some of that? How long do we have 25 minutes until the top of the hours are normal span? Wow, cool. Yeah, let's do some stock. I I wanted there's a at some some point it would be fun to talk about production and publication process. I we've talked a couple times I've talked a couple times about whether it's marked down or HTML or restructured text or or Google Docs or whatever. I realized that I had never really thought of prosfusion in this context, but prosfusion is is kind of like massive wiki light massive wiki without the links kind of, but the idea is still to use get and mark down as the underlying. So so anyway, I I wonder how much in in my perfect world, I guess we'd get something like this Google Doc, and we'd convert it to mark down and put it in a probably in chapters in a get repo. And then and then go from there. I posted earlier my own early thrashings on a Neo books production process. I put a link to the web page in the chat. And I would love to build like that out as much as you wish, like, but I and it can move, but I just wanted to start that because I think that what you're saying makes a lot of difference to whether we succeed or not. And then one of those is the project plan that you were pointing to and one of recent calls as well. So we should flush those things out. Yep. Cool. So how does someone how does someone get to the right vault and repo from a web published web page automatically? If they want, if somebody saw one of those pages and wanted to edit it on, I have two answers, a clunky answer and a better answer, clunky answer on a massive wiki, you can generally scroll down to the bottom of the page and there's a link to the repo, the home page of the repo. So massive pages should all have a link like that. Well, it depends on, you know, it's part of the theme, and it's up to the individual whoever's publishing it. The standard theme has that set up. Okay. A slightly better answer is when you're reading documentation, where people actually have a budget, not that we can do this massive wiki. When you're reading documentation, there's a little corner thing up at the top of the page that says edit this on edit this or correct this or comment on this. Even in massive wiki, we could have a little button somewhere that floats on top of the content. You click it and, you know, it pops open. A thing could be on GitHub, could be someplace else. You know, hi, you're talking about this page. You know, type your comment here or and then click to send it to the authors. So it's pretty easy to pretty easy. I mean, there's some development work there, but conceptually it's very easy. It's doable. Yeah. Cool. Other thoughts before you dive in? Substack, you can use custom domains and there's a $50 one-time setup theme. We can postpone that though, right? Technically, yes. I mean, market-wise, it's a question of your goals and resources. And I mean, we could start a discussion right now on what should we call this particular substack, which is probably something we need to resolve because you need to fill it out on the form. Yeah. And maybe the custom domain is a weird place to start that from, but I guess it kind of comes down to that. Someday, there will be newbooks.openglobalvine.com or whatever, and that'll be the substack for OGM newbooks. A different question is this, I think if this is one newbook group, we could write up all the things that we do to do newbooks and then some other group in Japan or Switzerland or whatever could say, hey, we're going to do newbooks, except we're going to, here's the way, we do them almost the way they do it, we do it differently. And we're the Swaziland newbook group. That would be a super wonderful thing. So for this newbook group, do we want one substack or do we want one substack per book or do we want one substack for all the climate, soil, books that we're working on and then another book, another substack for all the social studies and psychology and books that we're working on or whatever. And the model that I was working with as we started talking about this was that the substack would sort of belong to the newbooks project and be attached to it, which means it would be a channel for any nugget generated by any incipient newbook, and that would be kind of the boundary of it, and which would mean it would hop subjects, it wouldn't be a subject constrained substack. And would use hashtags for probably the book title and the couple of the book subjects. And direct links to where the project homepage would live. So then we've talked previously this newbooks team is the open global mind newbooks team. So then there's the Swaziland newbooks team and that's a different substack. But everything I just said was just my conceit and the reason how I was thinking about this totally happy to consider other ways of thinking about it, including I mean, the thing I was thinking was like Pete, you have substacks and ghosts and all that. What if there was an Uber stack that ate some of your other substacks because it made sense to flow those things all on the same stream? I'm not sure that's going to work, but that's a possibility. Yep. I like the way you're thinking. And you can have multiple accounts within one substack, right? Yes, multiple team members. Yeah. And do they each have different passwords or is one password? Yeah, everybody's got a consign in and work on the publication. Yeah. How about I cover the $50 setup fee? It's, Jerry's kind of right. The way he asked the question made me balk. We can totally have newbooks.substack.com right now for free. If we want a newbooks.openglobalmind.com, I don't know if it's available. If we want newbooks.openglobalmind.com, that would be the $50. There's no reason to go there right now. So newbooks.substack.com is available and works and doesn't cost anything else. If we want to point to it from a domain we own as a subdomain, then the fee kicks in, which is a thing I think we're going to hit, but I don't know if we need to solve that right now. Does that make sense? In this case, newbooks is like the publisher, right? Yeah. And each book is still going to need its own marketing strategy, right? So you're still going to, like, to me, the book is just a platform for you to go off and do other stuff, I think, right? And that's my experience watching other authors too. So you're still going to need to sub-stack for your book, I think, right? Each book is going to have to have its own thing. I like that. You're totally right, David. And I think we're not quite sophisticated enough to do that yet. Well, but if an author is like, you know, like across his case, I mean, you're already out there as a, you know, as a spokesperson, you've got, you've had these fantastic events that, you know, you're, they just kind of establish you as a thought leader. And the book is a great excuse to get on a bunch of other podcasts and, you know, get on the NPR stations and, you know, all kinds of things. But I think it's, that's why you do the book. Because we could turn this into a business. Unless you're Jim Cashel, in which case you do the book as tax deductions for your travel. But it seems like that would work in this setup where you have multiple channels, right, under one account. Is that correct? So the architecture that Jerry described, so Jerry's, Jerry and Open Global Mind, and probably the kind of the new books team in OGM, such as it is, the folks that come here, Stuart and, and Stacey and whoever. It's a Neobooks team. The Neobooks team is thinking that it works on multiple books, you know, this month, this quarter is classes new classes book on climate and cell health and, and, you know, next, next it's going to be Stuart's book on conflict resolution, and next it's going to be, etc. Right. So Jerry is thinking there should be a Neobooks substack where this week we're posting about climate health and classes book and classes book number two coming up. And next week we're posting about Stuart's book on conflict resolution. So if you're subscribed to that new that that thing, you see a bunch of stuff about different Neobooks, all related to OGM. So what Dave is saying is very smart is like, eh, books are anymore are a platform a way to say, hey, look, this guy is also an author, and a public speaker, and, you know, he knows a lot of stuff. And look, he's written this amazing book that's gotten great reviews. So for that, in that concept, you'd want a separate step to sec just for that book. And maybe for the second book, maybe not. So you would have a book, I forget the name of this book, but, you know, soilhouse, soilhouse with class mug or whatever sit dot substack dot com. So and then, and then every week, every day, you'd be posting, hey, here's a tip about the small water cycle. Here's a tip about, you know, talking to people in the red, you know, red color group. Here's a tidbit that's and here's a news item about, you know, Monsanto or Bayer, who's having trouble with lawsuits, you know, et cetera, et cetera. So a couple of thoughts to add in there. Two different thoughts, maybe one of them is some of the posts on this substack will be meta Neobooks posts about the process of Neobooks and what Neobooks are. And they will be like interspersed inter twinkle with actual nuggets that are meant to be part of books. Right. And I think that will make it interesting and spicy and different from what it otherwise might be, which is just kind of a potpourri of chapter excerpts from very different books. So if we start posting sort of loyally to it as, hey, this is this is the Neobooks journey. And this is where it's going to go. And, you know, I think that that could get like really interesting and pick up some, some more interest. And then the second thing is, at some point, class, if you wanted to, you could start your own sub stack for the for the book, but then you'd have to maintain a sub stack. And by banding together, no one of us has to pull the freight of publishing regularly on a schedule to do a sub stack. But rather, we can count on a bunch of different activities feeding a stream that is big enough and interesting enough to sort of suit people, as long as it's not too confusing to the people receiving it at the other end. And then third thought, maybe I'll add is Klaus, what this gives you easily is URLs that live in the world that you can point people to. And it sort of doesn't matter what the wrapper was around around that. There's that there's a post out there that you can say, hey, this is really important. Go look at this, right. And I like that a lot about this arrangement and about using sub stack to do this is that in the end, there's a permalink you can share with people that that takes them to a particular spot. Yeah, that seems to me. It's it's not either or either. So there's a new books one. At some point, Klaus or more likely his social media manager could be writing the post that goes on to both of those sub stacks and just cross post. Yep. So that's what you would end up doing. Yeah. And then she would also post it to Instagram and tiktok and ticket and press release and take advantage of all the fan outs. Yeah, all the distribution lists. Cool. I got one question about the sub stack thing. Please. Are we going to have chats and notes? Yes. We're going to use those. Yes. Yeah, right. I know. See. So I want. Well, we'll delegate it to the the public relations manager for new books. Yeah. GPT. GPT chat. I can't my face. You did somehow. I just I know I like the notes, but I have found in some of the such stacks of on that people ask for comments. And when you make comments, it's like nothing ever happens. So it's like, let's have a conversation, but no conversation happens. Well, some tech has that feature. Is that something we can turn on or off? Yeah, I think so. Well, I certainly because not all such stacks don't all have notes. So I'm saying, hey, I've just started, but it's interesting. But it's like Pete says, none of this. If you want to be out in the world, then use these tools to engage people and they want to be engaged. You got to be there to be engaged with. So very engaging. Well, so that kind of means that we're agreeing to show up when people make comments on the nuggets that matter to us. If we do notes and chat. Yes. Maybe a different way to say that is we should we should not have notes and chats until we agree to stop them. A third a third way to say that. And this is not generating any reactions from my OS. A third way to think about that is to turn off the sub stack feature for notes and chat. Maybe and then say, Hey, if you'd like to talk about this, come back to the wiki and then sort out how the conversation could happen around the wiki page. But what we really want is a thriving conversation around the wiki page. We just don't have all the all the bits and bits and bobs in place to do that properly. Yes, no, that's the I like the general generalization of it. That's the worst of all possible worlds. I know, I know, because then we can chat at all. Yeah, I love the the utopian perspective with that, you know, that's so much conversation going on because we're overwhelmed. We have to go to the wiki. Oh, my God, people love this. Thanks. Oh, so you'd like to make a comment? Okay, now download obsidian and then install the git plugin and then all that to post a picture of a pretty Asian woman. Yes. An AI generated one. So, Pete, we are rapidly running out of time on this call to think we thought we were going to get done. In the background, I am. So let's do it. Do you want a screen share? I will screen share. Great. Cool. Thanks. We'll see what will happen. So I think what we've learned is that we'll create the sub stack with the OGM admin account and then everybody will get an anybody wants one. We'll get an individual account of their own, invited to it. Sounds great. And so, oh, create an account first. No. No, see, by the way, subscribe to seven and continue. It needs you to subscribe to seven, right? Oh, I think they checked in for me. Yeah. Oh, wow. I can't unselect all, but I can. I think you could at the top. It was like, I think there was a way to at one point. Right. Sounds good. And handle was going to be visible to the outside world or I believe so. Yeah. So this should be open global mind, right? Yeah. That's what I'm thinking. I don't know how they're going to feel about a URL in here. Yeah. You know, give it a try. We'll come back and fix this later. Yep. Oh my gosh. Wow. Cool. Engagement, engagement, engagement. Yeah. So I had for invite friends unless we want to decorate, unless we want to decorate. Yeah. Okay. Continue. Open global mind. So this should, is Neobooks? I think it should be Neobooks. I don't think this is a broader OGM sub stack, although I'm easily convinced otherwise. But I like this being a focused Neobooks project, the sub stack. So the handle known as open global mind is not going to be able to make an open global mind sub stack, which it's probably okay. Yeah. Oh, because you can only do one sub stack per email? No, you can do. Yeah, that's true. You're totally right. I selected Neobooks dot there. That's better than Neobook. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Massive email list, I presume. Good. Let's skip that for now. I don't think we have any. Okay. And we want to add authors to subscribers. This is subscribers. Yeah. I'll just do us for now. Cool. Let's skip for now. Let's do this. Wait. We have a sub stack. Oh my gosh. Wow. Okay. So Jerry and I have this admin username password and we're probably not going to use it very much. So I'm going to his settings. I will sign in as myself on my regular browser also here. So I won't come in as the admin, I don't think. I'm going to make this into Neobooks. You know the capital B keys? All right. Copy right over. Yeah, open global mind. Yep. I'm glad I got to this part, but this is not what I was expecting here. Team. Here's what I was expecting. Cool. This scoring is hinky here. Which other emails do you guys want to have on here? I think what I would suggest is for us to kick the tire story and then, well, either way. Bill, do you want to help kick the tires or do you want to be invited later? Well, I'm getting down to class now. Cool. David and class will, you know, we'll, we'll dress up the windows and put some carpet down and then invite you in. Does that make sense? Good. So now I will go try to accept the invite in another window. You've been invited to become a member of Opens Substack. Exciting. I love how we had open global mind as its name. So now it's calling it open. Hi, open. Nice to see you open. I haven't had that happen before. It's good. So Peter is now private. This great out thing is not working for me. It's fixed now. It's going to be public. And he's going to be an admin. I've been invited as well. I'm accepting now. Cool. I presume you're public. Yeah. And I presume you're admin. Yep. Thank you. Bill, let me know when you accept and I can. Yeah, I gotta go. We have some talk to the groomer thing coming up in a little bit. So I'm going to get to him. Yeah, just wait for another time. I think we're, we're set. Yeah, that's Jerry said. Now we need some more decoration and set location and stuff, but sounds great. Good progress feels really good. And I'm, and are we more or less together on the, like what this channel is about and what's going to go through it? I think so. I would love to see that run up some ways. Yeah. So new books, documents are in the new books folder on the OGM wiki. Correct. Yes. So the OGM wiki is currently the place where I'm writing anything about new books, including a very nascent draft of my own new book. So yeah. And what I'll do, I think what I'll do is I'll put up project pages for Klaus and Stuart and Rick who I think all would like to play with the idea of publishing a new book so that when each of you posts, you can, you know, add that link and we can sort of keep that page updated. So anybody who wants to know, Hey, cause what's up with this bookwriting project you have, you'll have a URL that you can give people. That could work. So unless you think there's a better different way, but I think that'll be beneficial and it'll help straighten out what's where. And Klaus, you can say no, but I think one of the main pipelines for new books is going to be the Markdown GitHub thing. Is it okay if I take your book, turn it in Markdown and stick it in GitHub? I would wait a while to do that until we've got, I think what I think Bill's comments and stuff need to turn into a little bit of a tiny another pass and that's just me. But it's like, as soon as you want to share anything of it, I think you want the whole thing repoized. But I'm just saying that once it's repoized, it's out of sync and any changes Klaus makes, they're not going to get reflected easily. So I wouldn't suggest it if I thought that Klaus would still be making changes. I think Klaus would be kind of done. Let me do one more round of changes based on the conversation today. I mean, first of all, I think I'm going to frame what I just explained earlier. There's these three books in our pieces and tie this together. So maybe I'm putting an introduction that contextualizes how this is supposed to flow. And then let me see if I can put in some links to supporting articles. In a couple hours, I will be uploading this calls transcript and video and all that as I usually do. So if you want, go into the transcript and just look for that stretch where you explained it and start from there if you want. That'll get there. Yeah, yeah, that was ad hoc. So ad hoc is good. Sometimes it works well. That's why we have the recording in the transcript. Yeah. So we have our Hawks. That sounds good. And it is starting to pour down rain now here in Portland. What's rain? Oh, Nashville is my daughter and her three granddaughters. She just made it out of Tel Aviv. They were in the middle of this mess when the conflict started. I mean, it was something else to track her getting on the plane. I mean, finding an exit point, you know, portable stuff. That's crazy. Glad she's here. Yeah, I'm here in the middle of this Israeli community because she married a boy from Tel Aviv. And you know, you talk, I met a couple of her friends yesterday and they both had brothers in the war. You know, you can imagine how emotional that all is. Wow. Where is the world? It is. Okay. Thank you all. Thanks all. More soon. Bye-bye. Bye.