 So this is a call to discuss composting in the spirit of weaving the world on Friday, December 17, 2020. Brilliant. And Bentley you're having still having trouble finding your video. There's the OBS. There's there's the virtual cam. Yeah, but you can't find your way back to your natural physical cam. Oh, you did it. My built-in camera so fix it. You did it. You're here. Okay, Wendy. Long time no speak. That was like a princess wave. You got totally this is the royalty wave. And then this is the don't talk to the pinky wave. I mean, don't don't talk to the pinky because the hand don't don't want to talk to you anymore. That one needs practice. Yeah, I know it's I just, I don't have it. It's sort of like my British accent. You also don't have right precisely precisely exactly, although I tend to enunciate words and I've had people ask me if I was British before and I'm like, is that just because I'm completing the words. I don't know. You don't have to go into the bathroom. We have we're beginning to have some episodes called weaving the world which I need to finish transcribing and assembling and posting, but, but we have a series of interviews, which will go in some direction. And the conceit of weaving the world is that we have follow on calls or shadow calls or right now I'm liking calling them composting calls, where we go back over the material and, and hopefully it's people who are already on the call but maybe also others who are interested in the watched the episode beforehand, where we sit down and enrich the conversation, map about it, share the maps, connect the maps, do other kinds of things. It's an act of collective intelligence of some sort or at least of collective sense-making, how about that? And at this moment, we have very different tools on deck that don't talk to each other. So I'm a brain addict, Gene is a Kumu black belt and now a heavy, heavy, heavy Rome user. And I don't know what other tools you're in, but he's also reinstalled and deleted the brain. Oh, I don't know, eight, 10 times in your life? Or more, possibly more. Wendy is freeform with Scapple and I don't know what else. Bentley is, which tools do you prefer? I build my own, I don't know. So, why use a tool that someone else has spent a lot of time crafting with a lot of people when you can just spend twice as much time building your own tool and get half as much done? Makes so much sense to me. I mean, yeah, I mean, who can argue with that logic? Right. Not I. So, part of what I wanted to do here was not to compost the call that I had broadcast, but rather to just slow things down for a second and talk about composting. And then, if we do this right, to come up with a series of questions that composting should sort of address or answer, maybe even a process for the composting calls, like, why don't we start with this, continue to this and end with this, or something like that? I don't know, but I'm trying to figure out and totally open also to what do you mean composting that sounds ridiculous? Like, if that's your response to it, then I shouldn't go waste a whole lot of time writing new code to invent the new thing called composting. But I have this feeling that slowing down conversations and then going back in and making them better will help. So, and I would like to just add something to what I said earlier. I'd like to invite the participants, including the guests who were on the original episodes into the composting call. So if Daryl Davis wanted to show up and think about what was said during his interview with me and then go deeper and see where that goes, that's extremely cool. And also it helps us kind of trace back where do particular statements come from? Like what is the evidence or the basis for thinking something, saying something? What might that turn into as policy or what would you do because of that? What is replicable? There's a whole bunch of really nice questions that you don't get to when you're just ripping on through a conversation, however interesting that might be. So I'm trying a little bit to slow down and pay more attention. I'm trying a little bit to combine our perspectives on the same conversation and then enrich them. I'm trying a little bit to create a richer asset between us that can be in the commons, that is the leave behind artifact that describes what happened and what that nugget of activity might mean in the broader world. Now I'll shut up, at least for 30 seconds. Thoughts, anyone? I've been thinking about the composting call and some of the questions I think I saw someone asked maybe it was even Wendy about like, are we supposed to watch the video beforehand? Oh, I didn't. I think that was Nancy. We're gonna actually go without, right, you're right. And then what do we do during the actual call and afterwards and a lot of people talk about what we want, the stuff that did not have to happen during the call. So there's two ways I thought of it. One would be great just as a kind of a co-working room to where you're all sitting down and doing your own thing and then someone might ask a question and pop up but it could be a work session more than actual discussion. It could be a place where people are, they just know they wanna participate in something cool and so they might just come in without an idea or want to team up with someone else that's already doing something. And it may be just a discussion kind of like a book club where you talk about what were some interesting parts of the interview that we think we should tease out and maybe two or three people could choose to take one segment and map that one segment in three or four different ways or something. Those are the purposes I think could come out of a meeting. And then I guess one other is, we talked about having a consolidation, can't remember the actual C word we used, video at the end but now I'm thinking maybe the grouped together are curated artifacts collection kind of like a museum exhibit. We're taking some of these things and piecing them together. That may, maybe that's more of an interactive piece than just a video, although I think it'd be good to have a video of it anyways afterwards. So that composite call could even be after people have created some content and maybe it's talking about how that content gets woven together. Right. So I just threw a whole bunch of ideas out without any directions. That's lovely, that's perfect. That's very composty. It's like there's a little couple snippets off the green onions and then there's like a piece of squash and squash peel and some seeds and then like a little bit of the fat off the steak. So there we are. Ripping off of that. I really think Vincent would be a good person to invite to talk about this because I think his platform is quickly moving there where it could be a good space for all the different pieces. Because I wasn't even thinking you and I were talking a little before Jerry but I wasn't thinking about the repository part of it also, right? So, which of course is essential. So it could be a good repository and I know he knows how to embed KumuMap. So it could be, we could use Kumu until we come up with something that we like better, right? To map and now that he's reorganized his database I think the organization of that page for the repository, the organization of and then the resulting KumuMap would be much more useful. And also the simplest thing for us to do is kind of to link to one another's maps and insights and to kind of build sort of in parallel different entities using whatever mix of tools we each prefer sort of moving toward the center of what the topic is. And I have no idea what this is gonna look like in 10 years. Go ahead. Yeah, and I guess just to make sure I was being clear where his site could hold all the different versions of the maps I don't think his site yet could be the final, right? It would just be a holding space. Which is kind of why I said if we each point to each other then you can get to all the different artifacts kind of from whatever path you find your way in and there is no canonical single reference version in the middle. And then maybe we figure out how to separate the data from the tools and maybe we wind up creating or joining an effort to create open linked reliable contextualized data in which case that actually becomes the asset in the middle and we're all just kind of living on top of the asset, enriching it, adding to it linking it and using it all the time. And then that sort of becomes the artifact and the artifact then isn't held in anybody's tool there's no vertical here's the data in the database but rather the data sprinkled through IPFS or in some distributed store. We now have a way to have different lenses or tools access and improve the data as we go. And again, we don't have that today but I would love to be there in five or 10 years. And that makes it easier to figure out where the center is or what the asset is or something like that. Cause then the asset is this layer of information that conceptually I picture as a layer above things like Wikipedia which is a layer itself of facts and pages about stuff. So what do you perceive is missing? Whole bunch of stuff. What do you mean about where it could be in five or 10 years? Yeah, you mean what's, why can't we do that now? Well, partly the data is stuck in each tool. So Kumu can import some database files and other sorts of stuff, but it's, it creates a Kumu file that, you know, that I can't look at from the brain for example and you can't, I think you can't go inspect from graph fizz, am I wrong about that? And same for the brain. It depends upon whether or not you have access. I mean, if you develop your brain on your desktop but you publish it to the web, right? So if you make it public on the web anybody can link to any element in your brain not just to the brain they can actually link to individual elements, okay? So my understanding is that even though I published my brain openly right now you've actually got to go in through an instance of the brain on the brain server to get to my data. Now we have exported my data into a large bag of JSON objects in a NoSQL database but nobody knows where that is. Nobody's been playing with it yet, right? Well, everything has to be somewhere. Yeah. Okay. So I mean, you have to, whatever it is that's been created is sitting somewhere. Yeah. You have to get to it. So you said you have to get to an instance of the brain through the brain server. Well, if it was in Google Drive you'd have to get to it through an access to Google Drive. In other words, you have to provide read or read write access to whatever it is that you choose to make public. Right. But part of it is access privileges to the file which is doable at the file system layer. Part of it is, hey, this is actually an instance of proprietary software called the brain. And unless you're running an instance of that server you don't get to see and visualize the data that's tucked right there. And I think that's harder somehow, right? Cause there's no AP, at this point, I think there's no API where you can actually programmatically make a call into the data that's being kept in this brain format. So I might give you a file access but you couldn't do very much with it at this point yet. Correct me if I'm wrong, Bentley also. Well, I'm not quite. I think what Jerry is getting at is kind of a longterm vision where we kind of have the raw data and it can be pulled up in multiple systems at the same time with different visualizations of different ways of looking at it. I think that's a pretty large discussion on what it even means. And maybe we should get back to the problem. Okay. Well, including access privileges and stuff like that. And the reason I say that this is a further vision far out that maybe in five or 10 years is that I think that that's complicated. As you just said, but Gene to address your question, that's one of the things that I think would help us actually collaborate in this space as opposed to every one of us who's interested in doing this is busy curating our own little snippet of the world, our own little tiny sort of view into the universe and trying to figure this out. Now, I'm very interested in what like Rome collaborators are doing in multi-user Rome spaces where they're all editing things or Athens or other kinds of tools that already within the tool permit collaborative editing and collaborative creation of that space. That's really interesting to me. But I'm looking for the step beyond also eventually which is the collaboration across tools or at least the conversation across tools. It doesn't need to be, I can go in and edit your thing but how do I link more intimately to the cool stuff you've built? Does that make sense? So for instance, where you've got a food systems kumu diagram that's a really, really great systems diagram about how things work. I would love to sort of have that somehow exist within the same space that I'm doing brain stuff in but a systems diagram is a different thing than a brain display, right? So having one in the other, the construct isn't accommodated, okay? It depends on how you're looking at it though because well, and here I'm talking about my pay grade because I am not an information architect and I don't know exactly what's being done at these levels. And as Bentley said, maybe we should get more closer to what composting actually is and means and how we do it pragmatically because we're in a bit of an abstract kind of like where's the data and how does it live conversations? Yeah, so I think, go ahead. So the way that they have continued to evolve the brain so that you can link to that map and have it show up as though it's a page in the brain. In other words, you split the view and the content of the link shows up on the right hand side of the bottom, wherever you put it. It looks like it's actually in the brain only, it's actually somewhere else. So it's embedded actually in the notes page kind of because the notes will handle embedding. Is that sort of what you're saying? Right. Yeah, because every thought in the brain has a notes page and then the notes pages, they just rewrote all the software so it's not pretty powerful. It now has Rome-like backlinks-ish but it also has pretty powerful embedding. And one of the things that Mark Trexler did, I think, which kind of confused me, but I got the power, was he embedded my brain and his brain in the notes field. So you could sort of see my brain sitting there within his climate web brain. And I'm like, I just went one recursive loop too many and my brain broke. But I get that that's doable and interesting and possibly powerful as well. So you could in fact have a Rome graph embedded in the notes field. Right. Yeah, so we should play with that. And I think that might be super interesting where, and conversely, there could be links from the Rome database within Rome out to the brain, which is also likewise embeddable in different places. I don't know how friendly it is to embedding but I've embedded it before. And so each of us in the maps that we're holding could say, oh, and by the way over here is a shared cultivated garden of interesting stuff. And that's doable today with what the tools already do, which is good. So partly I'm also trying to get back to what does it look like to deepen the conversation on a topic that happened? And just riff on that for a bit. And I can bring up some examples if you want, go ahead. When we have these group groups, okay, which is I think a good description of them, they tend to be divergent, all right? And you corral them back in from time to time, all right? And then they go back out again. So that if you compost it afterwards, which is fine, you can call it that if you want to. You end up with a bunch of pieces throughout that discussion that are related to whatever the topic was that we were supposed to talk about. And then you got all these pieces off to the side, some of them loosely connected and some of them not connected at all. But one thought leads to another thought, leads to another thought and it just comes up. So you could in fact map it. You could map it in the brain, you could map it in Kumwe, you could put it in Rome. I think you could put it in almost anything. It's a matter of preference, though I don't, from my perspective, I'm not sure that there is a real best place to put it. It depends on what you want it to look like. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And also what you're trying to get done at that moment and also a bunch of other things, right? Are you just trying to, are you just trying to build a big beautiful resource list in which case you might want to use air table or bubble or something that's really good at a huge list, right? Are you also, are you trying to do a systems diagram, right? I can't fake a good systems diagram in the brain when you can do a beautiful one in Kumwe. And so I think the suitability to purpose of the thing at hand really matters here as well. So in the sense of- Which is the part that had me confused in terms of in the future, I can't see all of the content being accessible from one perspective because the construct of the content is different. Right, yes. And the idea that there are strands that go off in different directions, I'll just bring up my notes from my interview with Gerald Davis. So he talked about Mathias Cole, who was the head of the American Nazi Party after George Lincoln Rockwell was assassinated and how he ran it. He told an anecdote of how he ran into Cole and things that happened. So his sophomore high school year in his class called Problems of the 20th Century, Cole was a guest speaker, right? That happened to Davis in his life. And that's a segment in the video, which I'm not linking to here, which would be really fun to be able to link directly to that segment. So when you hit this nugget in my brain, you could play exactly that stretch of the video. And you can do that. And you could pretty easily do that. It would be just work, right? To go back and do a timestamp into the YouTube video in this sense. And then eight years later, Davis confronted Kale at a protest in Lafayette Park, all of which is in this sort of episode of this. But then when you start going to the American Nazi Party, you can go off in lots of different directions about the rise of neo-Nazism, about a whole bunch of other kinds of things. And I like that very much. So to me, composting is like inoculating something with mycelium. You want it to sort of break down the nutrients and then grow in whatever directions and then weave into other root systems and then make the exchange. So I like the visual of this has lots of little threads that are dead ends or go in different directions and it's not a neat package. I'm really comfortable with that. And this perspective on this conversation, this set of topics is in this one tool and it's not gonna easily connect to other perspectives but there are other rich perspectives also that you can go hop to through embedding or just by following a link. And for now, that's fine. Unless that breaks someone else's brain. And? So to me, the thing that's missing in creating a good composting conversation from the way we were talking about it so far is having kind of what you, what's the thing you want either, what point do you wanna reach at by the end? Where is this heading? Because if all it's doing is extending the conversation so that we get more connections in the brain for as an example. Okay, that's fun, but that's just more connections in the brain. I'm interested in getting a little bit closer to what's emerging, making some sense out of it, trying to get to some semblance of wisdom even though we haven't defined what that is either. To me, the composting is an interesting word in the sense that it's then providing nutrients for something to grow. So what is that thing that we want to grow? Because let's say it'll help guide the discussion. It doesn't mean that discussion has to be targeted at a specific thing because I agree with you letting it free flow is part of the joy of it, I think for a lot will be for a lot of people letting it go where it needs to go, but having some guidelines, some boundaries by way of expressing kind of where you want it to end or the question we're trying to answer or something will be an important piece of this so that it doesn't just go anywhere. Yeah. So in that spirit, so for me, what I think I'm trying to say is I'm interested in what I and anybody else who's joining for the composting think where are the tasty bits? And so for me, in my perspective, how can you hate me when you don't even know me is a really, really tasty bit and connects up to bridging the cultural divide, familiarity dispels fear, great questions. And I'm interested in making this better. Like this is a lot of resources, a lot of links. Here's a diffusing conspiracy theories. Here's people who left racist nationalist groups and it's a list of former Nazis and former skinheads and stuff like that. So I think one way of defining where are we trying to get to is to, a bad metaphor maybe but since I'm calling this composting, we're sort of trying to digest the call to better settle it into its greater context and to improve the important notes that are hit in that conversation. Does that make sense? And is that enough of a goal? And can we refine that? So you mentioned the rural community sustainable food system model that we developed. Right. I realize now based upon all the things that you said, we composted that on the fly. So that every one of the meetings that we had, there was six or eight people in the meeting. Every time someone brought up a comment, the question was, where's it go on the map? Yep. What's it connect to? What's the relationship? So that you didn't have to go back over the conversation later to figure out what the structure of the relationships were because you built them on the fly. And we went around and made sure everybody got a chance for their inputs, right? And some people would say, well, you know, I think this is relevant, but I don't know where it goes yet. So it would go on the map, but it's not yet connected, okay? And afterwards, in other words, all of those pieces were connected at the time that they were surfaced, but we went through it afterwards and distilled it into more refined views of what we initially developed. Yes. Yes, and because you had a sort of a project to build this map and the food system and because you had some participants who were trying to leave the conversation with a map they understood that would be helpful as a systems diagram that they could then use for the projects, every time you got together to talk, you were busy making the map better, asking important questions, things like that. So you're totally right. Your process with that feels like composting in that sense, but you had a narrower, more focused goal, an end product because you're looking for a map of the food system that would be useful to that community. Where here it's like we're trying to improve general knowledge and figure out how to solve the big puzzles. It's pretty... So even with that particular topic, you could build a map on the fly. By on the fly, what do you mean? As people offer comments or perspectives, you put them on the map and you... People look at them and ask them about, okay, is there someplace else on the map that this ought to connect to? Yes, and so that's a piece of the interesting thing is that most mappers are starting with a fresh sheet of paper and creating a new scaffold diagram or a new MindJet page or whatever else. And then when the page gets crowded, they're out of room. When Pete crogged, when he sort of post-processed the metaverse call we had, he spent a lot of time and energy creating new pages for basically the nouns that we mentioned, the people. And in fact, those people have representation somewhere out, he could have linked to the person's profile in LinkedIn, but he didn't do that. He created a page in the Wiki space for them. And one of the things that is groovy about doing this ongoing with evolved infrastructures or evolved substrates of content is that you're connecting to known entities all the time and you're sort of always weaving, you're weaving the stuff that exists instead of instantiating things either again, which means, oh my gosh, how often are we gonna have to write this name or do this thing or doing them fresh the first time? So I think that's a subtle and really important and interesting part of this process is that when there's a shared ongoing memory and when you connect up to some other thing that just got mentioned, it's rich already, that's cool. And you're kind of building this bridge between domains of interest, solution sets, whatever it might be, I don't know. And I have a feeling that that web of connections is really important. So the reason I like weaving the world is that the weaving feels like the warp in the weft of these little links between things that matter. Anyone else thoughts? I was thinking of a slightly different purpose. Cool. The title is Weaving the World. And so rather than taking the presentation sounds like, I mean, it is kind of finding the nuggets in there, but it's associating them with other stuff out there. So I kind of see this as a time for people to come in, see what maps and links that other people have made and link to their links. And then we're kind of bringing everything together and building that mycelium network. I think that would be a good use of time. And then making sure we're, like you were saying, cross-linking between all the things and then building out a few hubs like the OGM website and Vincent's site and a couple of things where we put a majority of the links and maybe throw everything in IPFS or whatever. So maybe that time is like, well, here's what I got or here's some links and stuff like that and how can we link these things up? How can we cross post? But it's kind of a coordination. And I think, so one model, we had a mapping hoedown early in the history of OGM, but I only posted it one time and we picked a topic and then we had different people come in with different tools and then we talked about the topic just for, I think, 20 minutes. And then we said, okay, let's go around the room and screen share what we did with that, with our tool. I think Robert Best was there with Mind Manager and someone was doing Miro and so on and so forth. And it was quite interesting and we just did it once, we should have kind of maybe repeated that because that could sort of easily turn into this kind of rhythm of composting. Yeah, Wendy. And it's partly, so one of the things I find from my use of the brain over time is that I get better at summary questions, I get better at synthesizing, I start to see connections that I didn't see before and it just sort of gets richer and more interesting in different ways. And I realize, oh damn, I should just create a collective thought for these great questions, right? And so then I can go in and find a way out from those places. And that feels to me like a move toward wisdom from just a big bucket of knowledge. I would, that's what I would love to see if you can get to in the composting, right? It's more than just adding in the connections that we all made, right? It's what do those connections start to tell us? Right, and this is gonna be a goofy example but just it occurs to me as an inspiration for me where some years ago I met a guy who cared a lot about history and Asia and all that and I was like, oh yeah, yeah. And the Mongols basically the Chinese build the great wall in some sense to prevent the Mongols from coming in and invading so often. And the Mongols bounce off the wall and go to Europe. And all of a sudden Europe's getting invaded because hey, the Mongols love planes that they can feed their horses off of and up until they hit mountains in Europe they're doing great. And then my conversational partner says, yes, but and then this and I was like, oh my God, I didn't know that. And there was this like layering of history that was beautiful that I wasn't, we were just standing in a lobby and he and I haven't talked since and I was just sitting thinking, how do we compare notes on things like that? And then say, oh, and I got this piece of insight from this book over here, you know, the secret history of Genghis Khan or whatever and this piece from over there that kind of weaving together of how things work is to me a new way of telling history and of making your way through history. And if along that journey, you're like, oh, and to understand this point, go watch this segment of this TEDx talk, that's brilliant. Like that's just fabulous. But what is it about that, right? Cause so far even in your example, you're talking about different pieces of data, right? And the only way I know it brought meaning to you was the way that you're talking about it. So what is it? Not talking about the fact in and of itself that you learned about history, but it's the change in your perspective or it was the change in your understanding, right? Or it was a piece of information that maybe conflicted with something that you knew before that it's the shift in perspective, understand it, right? That's what we're trying to go for not that we're trying to necessarily compost with that intention in mind, but if we can recreate a little bit of the environment that encourages those openings, right? That is the great stuff, right? So to me, creating the repository, making the connections is only the first step, right? And there are technical hurdles to that and those are important conversations and there are ways that we can view it and those are important conversations and there are ways to include people so we can get more connections and those are important conversations. But to me, they're all the foundation for a much richer conversation, which is, what does this mean? What is this telling us? Is this bringing us forward at all in either our individual or collective understanding of what we're trying to do here, right? And if the better verse is the goal, we don't even know what that means yet, can we conclude at the end of every call that what was our takeaway and how did this take us even just the tiniest step toward a better verse, right? If that's kind of our umbrella, right? So even if we were to use that as a compass, then we could mine the conversation by the end of the conversation saying, okay, all right, we had a fun conversation, we'll let it go everywhere. Here's a nugget, here's a nugget, here's a nugget, right? And we don't even have to do anything with it, but just acknowledging these were the little steps. This is how we expanded things a bit. I love that. Those connections are often narrative paths, they're often storytelling within the map for me. I'm just talking about my own experience in use, but some notes and some thoughts in my brain are just nouns, here's an association, here's a person, here's a song. Others are, hey, and I just looked and I never put the Mongols bounced off the Great Wall in my brain because I was gonna go show you that, but I never actually added that narrative. But there's a bunch of them that are sort of storytelling or opinion on purpose. And the opinions connect into larger stories and larger narratives and stuff like that. And on the one hand, I think that's interesting and useful and often opaque to newcomers coming in because they don't know which path to take or where to go. And then the second thing I think you said, which I think is hugely important is if this can become a rich venue for conversations where people are like, got it, and they can see things differently, and understand things and then contribute back to the growing of the shared asset, that's fabulous. So how do we, and then one thing might be, hey, if you're really interested in this topic over here in this little nexus, there's a thriving conversation over on Reddit, on this subreddit about it. Or there's a Discord server that in this period, go look at these dates to these dates, they had this super rich conversation about is AI conscious or not conscious, right? And those kinds of things would be really interesting additions to the shared map, because then you can actually find your way into the conversations, you're muted. Yeah, thank you. So you added something for me, which is a good reminder of not only would a composting call or anyone who watches it, right? Be an avenue to bring a community together to talk about these things and further our way towards Vetaverse, but it would also feed individuals' connections to other organizations or deeper learnings or things away from weaving the world that we may never ever know about. Bingo. Because of the repository and the way we're presenting it. And if we do this right, we're sending people off to great conversations about everything that are being hosted by other people in other places entirely. Yes. And in that way, giving them, supporting them and finding the things that serve them best and enabling them to serve the world better too as a result, making it all faster. Yeah, so just by tomorrow, we should have this. Yeah, exactly. And I mean, what's funny sort of a little bit from what Jean was saying a little earlier is that I think some of these tools are capable of a whole bunch of this right now. Some of it takes legwork, like embedding one of our displays and another display is a manual act and we have to go figure out where and how to tell people about it and how to make it make sense. Going and finding a segment. So YouTube has long had T equals number of seconds in offset. You can make a link like that super easily but they just added a feature. I'm not sure it's universally yet called clips which is, I think it's the same feature with an endpoint. So you can send somebody a call out into a video and they're watching a segment, not just a start point. That's really interesting. And I need to go find out more about whether, because I think they're rolling it out just a few users as a test, but that's nicer than just a pointer into an offset. And then manually, you have to say, oh, okay, for this segment, I got that idea from this point. And then one of the ideas that came up during one of the recent calls around this topic was wouldn't it be cool if while you were in the middle of our conversation, let's say one of the Thursday check-in calls, when there was a really interesting thread that happened, you would hit like a red button, a little bookmark, a little happy icon or whatever. Oh yeah, I was bringing that up. Yeah. And then AI could look back on the transcript and say, oh, at this point, like six people in the call did the shaky hand gesture or raised flags, let's go find, let's go find how long that clip is on this topic. Sort of some real content analysis that goes back into the transcript and says, oh, it seems to have started over here and then automatically create a bookmark to that spot and make that easy to put in other places, easy to refer to, et cetera. That would be very cool. Very cool. And that's kind of wishlist. And Bentley, I wanna know more about how you're envisioning the video, just the video player thing that you're prototyping and thinking about. What I just described is like four steps beyond what you're thinking about entirely, but not unrelated at all. Yeah, and so how might that work? Yes, so I know that we have this interview and then people are building maps and other mostly visual displays, sometimes hexed by Whitney. So what I wanted to do was I was thinking about how can we combine all these into a video later on and then just with some other stuff working on. The question is, I thought, well, wouldn't it be neat if anyone could come in and add their maps to the correct part of the video where they would like it to display? And I realized I could do that all in JavaScript. And this also is very similar to Jerry to your, you hate that, is it Prezi that went away or they changed, right? It's Prezi, it's Prezi. They lobotomized themselves. Yeah, it won't follow the Prezi format, but I'm really starting to think it's more than a video thing. It's more like a presentation thing. So anyways, you could have you and the interviewee talking and then up would come up someone's Kumu map. And if it's a video later on, then it would just be a picture of it and maybe they could be navigating around. But also if they're viewing this on a website, that could be an embed, right? And they could pause the video and play with the map and then hit play in the computer and then that would, and then there might be a third thing that pops up. And then also I was thinking, there's a lot of times where during your interview, and I'm sorry I forgot his name, but the NFT guy you're talking to. Jesse Engel. Yeah, so Jesse was using a lot of terminology that a lot of people may not be familiar with it. I was thinking, oh, I just reinvented pop-up video, right? Things popping up, but they would also have links in them. So yeah, so then making an editor later on to where anyone could go and take all the different content that we have and create playlists. A playlist may be in the wrong term, but it's like a dynamic single video of interrelated stuff where things pop in and pop out at different timing. It's like an enriched path through the video and related stuff. And it looks a little bit like FedWiki. I mean, you know how in FedWiki you keep getting these vertical panels that sort of show up as you go deeper through the wiki? That's one kind of limited way of thinking about it, but the vertical panels are often explaining what just happened. You know, you're basically going deeper through the same topic. So here a panel could be a static page or an embedded object or a KUMA map or it could be a video or something else. Somebody's really angry at somebody else outside. That was a very long honk. I don't know if you heard that. Yeah, so in the visualization, so the example I had did happen to use kind of like three columns, but I was also thinking on a mobile device it would probably be kind of three rows. And what's interesting about that is that you could scroll up and choose to focus on different things while the video is playing and interact with things while they're going on. So yeah, that's the idea, but have it where people later on, have it where people could come in, create their own kind of presentation with all the content or add their stuff to request their piece, say, hey, at five minutes into the conversation that there'd be a forum that they could go up and put in, here's a video, here's a link to my KUMA map on what they talked about there. It's funny, when I realized that Prezi had become a dead end, I Googled, of course, open source Prezi and I found a couple of different things and I found one thing that looked really promising until I realized all it was, in some other place you author stuff and you feed it a list of what you want to show on screen and all it does is scroll around and do the effect of following the path. It doesn't let you off of the path, it did nothing else whatsoever. And I was like, oh man, that's just really like weak beer. And Miro and the brain don't let you tell a story the way Prezi does, but they ain't that far from it. And one of the features I wanted Harlan to add to the brain was paths, give me playlists, let me specify, hey, click here and it'll take you through a particular path through the brain and maybe even do what Prezi was doing at the end, which is you could attach an audio clip to each node so that it plays a story as you go through. With Miro, you can do frames, but it's really clumsy to go from frame to frame and there's no way to say, play me, connect these frames automatically when I hit next. That doesn't happen. That could be a feature. Although that's a pretty easy plugin though. Yeah, that would be an easy, and at least Miro has a plugin architecture and we know a Black Belt Miro user for three. So you could maybe hack Miro to do what Prezi was doing. That'd be really interesting. Yeah, some of it, and a lot of these tools can import and export sort of to each other, because you can import some aspects of call metadata into Miro and map it out programmatically and you can import some of that data over into Kumu and see how it interacts and stuff like that. Now, Jerry, to your idea of the path through, so the backend is all set up for that, the database and the API from what Mark and Talon's done and I talked about, let's just recreate how you use the brain, just as a simple UI, leaving out the pieces you don't use. But now, maybe the first kind of use case is to create that path tool where you can just put in timings and select links and it would walk you through it and then later the audio files. That would be that hard to do. So I don't know if you wanna put that on your list of wish list. We should sit down and refine what that is, because I have a vague idea of what your viewer demo did, but I'm not sure because like... Oh, this would be a separate thing. The separate thing entirely, yeah. But I was thinking that when you bring up the brain in the video in it, so in my kind of video weaver thing, I was gonna bring up the brain, but the brain is designed for a big screen. So really what I decided is I'd almost like, in the other day I pulled it up on my phone and I'm like, I would like to explore the brain on my phone. So also making a phone interface for the brain, I think would be helpful and I haven't quite thought of how to do that yet. But even if it just like listed here, I don't know even what you call it, but here's the first five ups, and you can click more. Here's the first five downs and here's the first five sideways in three different rows. Yeah, panels that go up and down. And I think I told you that Kenneth Tyler and I long ago used his seed wiki to experiment on PowerPoint, blog, and brain, and he just used frames. So there was a frame, there was a top frame across the whole screen that was parent thoughts. There was a middle frame that was the active thought. There was a side panel for sibling thoughts and there was a lower pane for child thoughts and they were all listed there. Like it was just a call into each direction. And it worked remarkably, it was ugly as sin, but it worked remarkably well. Yeah, I guess for mobile, having a scrollable pane at the top and a scrollable pane at the bottom would be doable. I just don't know how to make it easy to get to the sidelines. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Jean, did you want to jump in? No, not particularly. In other words, we're off on one of these. Yeah, that would be a separate app from the viewer. But I thought it would be helpful to embed that in the viewer rather than the whole brain. But yeah, it's a bit off path. Yeah. So in terms of an environment that multiple people could contribute to on the plot, in other words, the problem with the brain is one user is not cheap and five users is outrageous, all right? And I had a need for an environment that would allow multiple people to edit the environment simultaneously. And Rome gave me that. So with my subscription, I can create a Rome graph and give 100 people edit access to it or my subscription fee and there's no addition to it. Huh, they don't have to be paid up Rome members. They can just be. No, they just have to have a Rome account. An account. But they don't have to subscribe. And you can set it up so that some people can view or you can make the whole thing public if you want to. So if you don't make it public, some people can view and some people can edit and you can also implement what's called immutable blocks, which says you can't edit anybody's blocks, but your own. Though if I create a block and you want to essentially edit it, you can reference it, essentially create a copy of that block and edit it to create your version of that block. And you can comment on blocks. Which is a little bit what Federico does. It gave me what I was looking for without, because I had tried using the brain in the past at one time with a couple of users and we crashed it. We lost a ton of content. And the people at the brain couldn't save it. I mean, they tried, but it was all messed up. So we keep looking. Yeah, yeah. Thank you. We're near the top of an hour and reasonable time to wrap. I'm just wondering, has this conversation better illustrated what composting might look like? What thoughts are in your head about making it better or making it work? Is this a quixotic quest? Anything like that? I'm not sure that composting is the real appropriate label for what you're talking about, at least. Alternate names, extremely welcome. What might we call this? Is this post-processing? Is this knowledge weaving? Is this info looming? Really, like I would love to better term for it. I'm going for composting just because I'm loving nature metaphors these days. And it feels like we're looking through the waste products and getting nutrients from them and weaving them in. So a better word? Well, I don't have one at the moment. Oh, no. I will ponder that. Okay, please, please. We distill and synthesize. And I'm trying to also have a friendlier goofy metaphor instead of synthesize or something like that. Because this is a form of collective synthesis or collaborative intelligence, no problem. I think that we're on that path, but I'm trying to avoid terminology that would stop people from just climbing in and trying to join in with a conversation. Is that only any thoughts? I don't know that we came to, we solved your problem of when are we going to have the next composting call and what are we going to do during the call? I was going to suggest maybe just go ahead and have people to go ahead and create their own weavings and post them in the MatterMos channel. So if anyone is inspired, they can take movement. Are you gonna just, do you think you're gonna just pick another time since Pete seems to think Goodle's no longer? I think his suggestion was just pick a couple sort of suggest a couple of times and then if somebody important sort of pops up and says that doesn't work, then move them around a little bit, but basically just start with some suggested times. And I'm comfortable putting some times out and then being flexed about how we use the times with depending on who shows up and what they're interested in. And back to the rural community sustainable model. Not only did we have meetings, Zoom meetings for a half a dozen people, two or three of the people worked on the map between the meetings. And then during the next meeting, they would sort of explain to everybody what it was that they did on their own. And we established a set of guidelines on how a person could go in and make changes to the map and leave a set of breadcrumbs that someone could follow so that we weren't actually destroying each other from one meeting to another, which would be very easy. Yeah, totally, totally. So you created some small community standards for collaborative work on our complicated document. That's good. That's very needed. Cool. So invite me to the next meeting, whenever that is. We'll do, and then we're bumping up on Christmas. I think the week between Christmas and New Year's might be good for some of this because some people are off their normal duties and relaxing, but some people might wanna participate. So I think I might try something Monday, Tuesday, the next week, I might actually skip to the following week. I'll be here, I'll be around. Cool, I'll be in the Zooms too. Good to see you again, Bentley. Yeah, good to see you again. Yeah, thank you very much. Really appreciate your co-thinking on this, your co-composting. Yeah. Bye, Joe. Bye for now. See you later.