 This is a quiet group. Hey, there he is. Good morning people. Good afternoon or evening. Hey there. Is there stillness in the land? Hey, don't wake everybody up. Exactly. It's actually really beautiful right now because we're having a gentle snowfall. Waking everything. I'm in Minnesota. So we're getting a gentle snowfall, not the big mass that New York got. It's just going to be a few inches, I think, and only for a few hours this morning, but it just sort of cleans up the whole landscape and make it fresh and beautiful. Ken, your beard almost demands you be outdoors, like maybe with some seal blubber hanging from your belt or something. Or from my teeth. Yes. I mean, I wasn't going to go there a little too graphic for this early. I'm actually. Barred from outdoors for a few days. I was out walking the other day and. Missed a step and twisted my ankle pretty good. So hence I'm on the couch today with my leg up on. I have a great use for an old yoga boaster. It's really works to elevate my leg. Well, I'm sorry to hear that. One of the things I learned with the fall of your solo is that they've changed the protocol and now they sort of recommend alternating heat and cold or even cold first. 48 hours instead of the first 24. Yeah, with the spring, I came home for ice. It's been, it'll be 48 hours this afternoon and I've got a compression bandage and I've been. Keeping elevated and keeping off of it and taking Arnica, which is really actually a pretty, it's as close as to a miracle drug as I'm aware of. Yep. It is pretty amazing. Ken, is that an ankle? It is an ankle. Yeah, I can, I can fix it for you. I'll send you something. Okay. It's called, it's called compression flossing. And I've used it on a number of people. And essentially what the issue is, is that the fluid that's in the joint needs the compression of muscles or something else in order to move it back up into the system. Elevation is. Okay, that's fine. But what if you squeeze? It's a whole different, like it's much more back. Anyway, I'll send you some stuff. It's called pressure philosophy. Compression flossing. Flossing. Take, take a bicycle inner tube, cut it in half. Now you have a long tube, slit that. Now you have a long strap. Wrap that around the joint, flex the joint through the range of motion as you can and picture yourself squeezing the fluid back into your system, which is what you're doing. You can do it as often as you want to do. And what it'll do is it'll increase the mobility. It'll reduce the pain. Because a lot of that pain is due to the swelling. And it's, it's actually the process by which. The healing happens because the area is flooded with all these chemicals that are trying to heal it. And then the flight. The fluid stains. We don't want the fluid there anymore. We want to get the fluid back out. So anyway, I'll send you some stuff. At what point you start, at what point do you start flossing? Well, Ideally, if you've had it looked at, and you know that it's not broken. Then you can, you can do it as long as you're pain limited. You know, meaning that, that, okay, it's just up to you how quickly you want to return to motion. And that's, that's acceptable. I had a really good trainer experience at a camp one time. We had an international counselor visiting. Visit the camp and I sprained my ankle pretty badly. And from the day at that point, their immediate treatment is alternating buckets of hot water and ice water. You know, for 10 minutes of temperature tolerance, and then you switch to the other one. And it does some of the same stuff's got in terms of really promoting the movement of fluids. In the injury area. But I'm going to look up compression. It's particularly important at the, it's particularly important at the end of your leg, that the bottom of your leg, because mechanically, you know, that the lymph there doesn't get back up unless you do something. And, and even elevating it just kind of like makes the, it makes it okay. You know, it doesn't, it doesn't, you actually want to push it back up. And you want to record these moves so that you can play them in fortnight as you do the flossing dance. Mm hmm. Yeah. Do we want to try to move our chat into matter most as much as possible or should we keep it in the zoom chat here? I'm good with matter most. I think there's several of us aren't on matter most or aren't aware of it. And Lauren is going to have trouble walking around with a selfie stick. And yeah, I think for the moment, maybe let's keep ourselves. In the usual configuration. So we using the local chat. Nice to see everybody. We are. We're into February. It's crazy. There's vaccines. The world seems different. I think we can see the light at the end of the tunnel. I was just talking with, with April this morning that. And correct me if I'm wrong. Doesn't it seem like pandemics usually run two years? Isn't it sort of at least, at least to you, like, if you look at this, the Spanish flu takes the world down for, for about two years before things walk back to more or less normal plagues before that are like decades and recur and there's like waves of plague, but, but modern pandemic seems to sort of take us out for a while, but I think we're on the, we're on the backup up hill climb out of the trough. Totally different world though, than it was in 1918. Yeah. Cherry, what is N equal to give you any predictive confidence? Yeah. N equal to of what? You're just counting two plagues. Oh, I'm generalizing from whatever plagues I've ever heard of. So, yeah, but you're generalizing from two, which seems like a small sample. That's true, but. Do you mean that in general plagues are probably shorter than, I mean, pandemics. I don't know. So the bubonic plague was a mess. Like the plague recurred over, over like more than decades. Over centuries. Yeah. What wasn't continuous, but recurred. Yeah. Yeah. So that was before, that was before the germ theory of disease. I mean, it was a totally different world. Yeah. Today I will note, we also have the terrain theory of disease, which like is an obstacle in some sense. Everybody knows what the difference between the germ theory and the terrain theory. No. So the germ theories that there's a bug that gives you something. So you need to knock at the bug and treat the bug. The terrain theories that if you maintain your body in a healthy state, your terrain is not capable of falling sick. Yeah. Yeah. And it's sort of, I don't really know, but it sort of seems to dismiss the bugs. No, it's an ecological theory. Scott's holding up something with that. The t-shirt says. Oh, you're muted. It says zombie proof. So this is actually my, my brand that I made a while ago for a hockey team and a training system, but it's that same principle. You build up yourself so that when it happens, you're ready to go rather than trying to recover after. Whatever events has already happened. Yeah. This is the same theory. You'll see an ecological agriculture. You know, which is that the ecosystem always contains a wide range of organisms, including pests. The pests are always there. Right. But in a healthy ecosystem, they're maintained by other factors, range of soil fertility to beneficial insects. I think it's important not to treat these as completely antithetical theories. Because even a healthy ecosystem can be deranged by an extreme invasion. I think it's really important to remember the people, the first nations people of Turtle Island, if anyways, read 1491 by Charles C man. Those people ate everything was organic. It was all local. They had a variety of foods between 150 to 200 different types of foods. It was for the most part, whatever they didn't preserve was fresh. They were incredibly physically robust. They had really low social stress compared to what we have today, low ecological stress. And yet within 10 years of the arrival of the Europeans, 90% of them were wiped out by novel viruses. So, you know, they had really strong immune systems, but they were not ready for something brand new. And the coronavirus is a novel virus. So, you know, it's all well and good to keep yourself really healthy and keep your immune system strong. But if something new comes along that's never seen before, it's going to take a long time for the thing to move through the whole body before it gets herd immunity. So we have to add the adaptation theory to the other two. Yeah, two points on that. The Spanish flu was unusual in that it killed off the young and the healthy first. It had a preference for young healthy people because it turned your immune system against you and flooded you with a cytokine storm. And if you had a really young, healthy immune system, you were actually far more vulnerable. So this doesn't always go the way you think it does. And then the second thing is I highly recommend the book Against the Grain by James Scott. And he goes to Mesopotamia and looks at the earliest cities, Uruk and Ur and all of that. And the skeletal remains of the people who are civilized inside the cities have malnutrition, lots of evidence of malnutrition because they were basically eating monocrops. They had been told to go make a lot of grain and they were eating mostly grain diets with a few other things where the Marsh Arabs, who were basically out in the Tigris and Euphrates area were incredibly healthy and they have all sorts of different variety in their diets. And then all of this then falls under guns, germs and steel and the whole idea that if you simply have no immunity to something that's ravaging, you're however, in some sense, however healthy you are, you're going to fall prey to it, I think. And that's where all my amateur epidemiology fall ends. Cool. So why don't we go to a round of check-ins? And why don't I check-in quickly first just because last time we ended with, well, what's up with you? And I think it's probably a good moment for that because a couple of things. One is we are, I think we're on the cusp of some organizational structure and actual financial and legal structure for OGM. We're testing the waters with this steward ownership model and we're entering conversations around it now. I don't know that it's necessarily the answer and there are many different people floating all kinds of different answers for what is the structure of the future, but part of the goal of this exercise is to model and live inside the possible next organizational scheme for how companies should be organized and how we take care of the commons and how we make a living while doing all those things, avoiding some of the vagaries and dangers and sharks of normal capitalism these days. So it's still a capitalistic thing, but I think that'll be interesting. Then a second thing is that free Jerry's brain is getting someplace where we're going to come back into the main group with some some challenges and some things to do, but also a friend of ours named David Bobville came in with a project he has to basically do combination of kind of art and visualization and space and a bunch of other things all heading toward the COP 26, which is the next climate summit, which is going to be held in Glasgow in November, but with a stop on Earth Day, which is 12 weeks away. So we're just now kind of sort of signing up where we're busy talking about what does that look like? How do we play? What do we do? And I think that it's going to be super interesting to kind of get to get ourselves organized around the thing that has deadlines and times and might actually get us some exposure and some figuring out what's going on there. And then Pete has been working on a bunch of air table panels for management of where are we? Who are we? What are we doing? All that kind of thing. They're not quite ready for all of us to start looking at and using, but they have me real excited because I think one of the things obviously we've been missing is a mirror of sorts, a techno mirror that lets us see what's up and where is it? Where is it? What is its status? What are the next steps? Those kinds of things. And Pete, I don't know if you want to talk for a second about that or we can also defer until we sort of bring it into the group, but that's also cooking on the burner. I'll defer. Cool. And then last and just personally, I'm busy looking for an Oregon or Portland based therapist who understands internal family systems therapy. I don't know if anybody's done IFS. I'm a huge fan of family systems therapy that goes back to Virginia Satir and Alice Miller and a bunch of other people, which is usually about the complex dynamics between members of the family. Internal family system says that there are parts inside of you and that they're all trying to help you and they're often cocking up the works. So how do you get them aligned and how do you figure out who those different sub parts of personality parts are and what's going on? So I'm looking around. My wife is it. My wife is a prominent IFS therapist in New York. She's a friend of Dick Schwartz and I'm sure she gets your referral there. Or these days it doesn't really matter where somebody is, does it? It matters only because I'm covered by Kaiser in Oregon, Washington states. And I think they have to be in territory to be in to be reimbursed in any way because in order to afford this, I probably have to do this through Kaiser. Interesting. So referrals in the Pacific Northwest would be fabulous. It's worth looking at talk space. I think it is and better help. Yeah. There's online therapy services now. Oh, cool. You know, it's not $0, but I don't know it sounds like a, like a massive investment, massive worthwhile investment, massively worthwhile talk space and therapy. Better help. Better help. Something like that. Cool. Thank you. And I'm trying to figure out how to get out of my own way. Essentially. You're here. Yeah. Many of us, I think, I think do that. Scott, it looked like you had something to jump in with. So is that like bow and family systems? That's, that's the other thing you were talking about. That's the, that's the dynamics. Which other family systems. I'm not even sure I know Bowen family systems. Is an umbrella term for 15 to 50. Now evolved forms of family therapy. I don't know that I know Bowen. I'd have to look him up in my brain. He's kind of the founder of it. And then, and then Friedman after him. Huh. Long time. Diagrams. Thank you. Yeah. His diagrams have. He builds them out of triangles. So he has the whole family and then, and then there's these triangles of influence. And he has a nice coding system that's very visual. You know, two lines is a strong dotted line is a week. You know, that kind of stuff. Oh, you do have him in there. So I've got Murray and Bowen theory, but I don't know much about him. He was at Georgetown. Geneagrams is something he did. And then I have it under family systems therapy. And there's structural family therapy. There's system constellations. Internal family systems. And a few other kinds of variants. And all of that is under types of therapy. And there are plenty. This is a through R. Yeah, this is a through R. Here's Gestalt, Jungian therapy, intersubjective psychoanalysis, hypnotherapy, human givens. I don't know what that one is motivational interviewing, which is really cool. And as a path forward right now, et cetera, et cetera. Sure. Can you pop that link into the chat? You bet types of therapy. I'll put that one in. You can find the other stuff underneath it. And that's my check-in. So let, hold on. There we go. So let's go. Lauren, you're on the hook. Are you going to be indoors soon? I should. I, I might want to go now just because I, I'm going to get off to go to Colonel. Yeah. I'm not going to be in Colonel. Do you mind? Should I do mine or should I wait? Please go ahead. Okay. I just wanted to say hi. And. You know, we do have the appreciation bites. If you want to use them, I'm not putting pressure on you, but Pete would have to help out. For today. If you wanted to do it. They're the. Just like a methodology of sending appreciations to people. If you wanted to do it, you can kind of look at them at the end. If you wanted to. And yeah, so. Charles and I are in Colonel. And so we've been super busy with that and. It just getting introduced to a lot of kind of movers and shakers and. Kind of crypto blockchain community. So that's cool. Yeah. I'm also in the process of getting some interns. At Kiko out. So gang should be. Yeah, it should be, it should be great. I'm super excited about that. That's it. It's nice to see everyone. That sounds awesome. Thank you. I put a link to the appreciation bites in the chat. It is a way to appreciate things that other people in our groups are doing. Can someone check to see whether this meeting, whether it's a meeting or a meeting. I think it's a good idea to put it in so that we can pick from it. You'll see what that means if you go in and try to do it. Because you get to pick a person in the, in the group. And then Lauren has created a really, really lovely set of attributes. The kinds of appreciations one might offer. And then there's also a notes field after that, where you can type in free form text that says why, what, whatever. And there's also a form where you can see the results. That's a really better one for you. You can see the results right now. This is for the results so you can see what a, what the finished appreciation start looking like. So then let's go. Mark Julian ingrid. And Mark is hunting for his unmute, but. Oh hi all. It's my first video here. So. The theme I've been working on is how to relate movements or organizations to actual power. And this was those of you who've read Kim Stanley Robinson's The Ministry for the Future, maybe might be aware of how he faces some difficult issues, you know, including some, violent means of overthrowing power, which will not voluntarily do so. However, I found a very interesting connection in Canadian context, which is that there's a governmental position called the Governor General, which represents the Queen, and actually the Queen of Canada, which happens to have the same human body as the Queen of England. And I think there's a way to reframe that. And the basic logic is very simple. It's based on the ancients saying that King and Queen, sorry, King, the King and the land are one, or you could say the Queen and the land are one. So basically the Governor General ultimately really represents the land. And so I think in a Canadian context is at least in theory a possible way for a seven generational view supported by something like a ministry for the future to actually be tied into power so that's actually what I'm exploring. And I think there are possibilities for this in Commonwealth countries in the UK, not in the US because that's a different system, but that's, that's, I think that that's one particular project I'm on so that's what I'm doing. Love that. Thank you. Kevin has to boogie pretty shortly so let's jump to Kevin next and then Julien and Ingrid. You're muted still. I'm on a laptop and it's not touch screen I keep forgetting I put my finger over there anyway. Yeah, I've been working on this community equity fund friends and family funding for entrepreneurs who don't have a rich uncle and we've kind of gotten our act together and are going to be on about three different event platforms and then spend about an hour and a half with the team today, segmenting our outreach to thought leaders on three segments. You know one is the top level David Brooks Charles blow kind of mass level then there's the folks who are looking and writing about a good new economy, and then they're the folks at the institutes who have an agenda for that and so we figured out our outreach around you know turning the concept into into a an influence machine and in a way and it's it's kind of fun to do it. I've done it enough times that we've actually sort of system is the instinct and so that's kind of interesting so anyway, that's all moving forward. That sounds awesome and I love hearing your progress. Thank you. Thank you. Let's go Julien Ingrid Vincent. My status, it's related to a quick story about Xerox Park where I did an internship years ago. And at park the only requirement they have from the scientists that was that every six months they do a status report. Otherwise, they were free to do what they want and actually park in that incarnation was the closest thing to a group mind have ever come across. But with regards to the status reports. The scientist was working on a way to automate the status reports. But that was a valid research project so it passed the administration. So in that vein my current hot topic is trying to trim down on zooms last week and this week have been spent almost entirely in zooms and I haven't gotten any work done. So right now focused on how to try on how to trim that down so I can get back to work. I think zoom means idleness and Swahili. Sorry, Ingrid Mark Vincent and sorry Mark already went Ingrid Vincent Bentley. I'm going to pass this week guys thanks. Sounds great. Thank you. Vincent Bentley close. So I have two things one I'm posting a link to a really cool article that I just read by the Rockwell Foundation about systems innovation. It was very intriguing because I felt crazy for a while in trying to like focus on too much and then people are saying like oh just pick one thing and focus on and do it well. And there's just one line from it says systems are productive are productive precisely because there are more than standalone products system pulls together all the different ingredients to meet a need. And it was talking about how like you can't have a contactless payment. Like he asked without a credit card and you can't have in like a shipping container without the ship and the containers and so like all these things work together in a system. And so that was really it's a really interesting read has some really cool visuals to. And the other thing I wanted to do was just share the calendar real quick and then take any questions about it so we can kind of like clean it up before. Before it starts getting like super used so let me just share my screen. So I posted a link in the chat to the document which is where we'll be throwing all of the different links. The first one is a link to a form. So if there's any event that is like related that you like like an event that you would post in the form or send out to the email list you can also just throw it on the calendar. And then there's this whole conference happening that I think people should know about and you can put the start time how long it is URL to the event. If you don't put a URL to the event it's going to automatically generate a Google meets link. And so if that's not the actual link or like you don't have the link yet just like that just one thing that it'll automatically generate a meats link so just be wary of that. And then you can put the event type if it's of general interest that's like any event that you kind of just want to like share with people but then we also have like is it a GM or people have internal or public and we can add more types so if you have any suggestions for types. And then if you hit draft it won't send it to the calendar right away and if you hit schedule it it'll immediately send it to the calendar. So we could put weekly or monthly reoccurring or one time event and if it's reoccurring for now we're just going to manually duplicate it a bunch of times until we make a system that does that automatically it's not too hard. And then just put your email in case we have any like questions or need to like change anything we could like, you know, know who submitted the event. Any questions here and I'm going to show what happens after you submit it. So once you submit an event, it first goes to the air table, and this gives us like a spreadsheet of all the events which can then be exported in a bunch of different formats. This could be the sent out is like a CSV and I cal if you wanted it. And we have the event link so if you put a link, it's going to go here if not this is going to take you so this takes like you to the collective next zoom for the GM call and for other things it takes you to a Google meets link. And you could also like filter and sort these if it got that there was like 100 events. There's also a gallery view with an event link and it tells you what organization, and then there's the Google calendar, which all of these three links can be embedded on any websites. So, on the new GM site, this can be embedded on the site or we can like filter down the air table to show only the public events and then put that view on the website. So if anyone needs an embed link to embed it on a website let me know, and I'll make a custom one. And, and then all the events are on this Google calendar and if you hit the plus in the bottom, then you'll subscribe to that calendar and so you'll have it as like a little checkbox in your Google calendar where you can check on it off and then see all the events. So I have the are the times presumed to be the user's time or you're going to put in a time zone display. So when you add an event at it in your local time it automatically will then convert it to UTC and then when you subscribe to the calendar it'll show it in your local time. If we embed this on the GM site and it's a public calendar that's visible. We creates a problem by making the zoom links visible and we're opening up risk of zoom bombing. Yeah, and so I love the idea and I want to embed this. I'm trying to figure out how do we keep the zoom the actual zoom links a little tucked away a little bit more from public view. So would we want to have would we want to have like, I guess would we want would be the ideal scenario would we want people to see the event but then have to like request the link or something like that. Ideally, you see that you see all the events and you can only access the link if you're a member of OGM or if you're and I and I can give you access to the OGM Google group which I use as an access control list. Right, so if you're on that list then you're good to go kind of thing that would work. I think and it may be more cumbersome. Sinking up with that that the Google group is work. It's a lot of work. But Vincent, I think a way to do it would be to put zoom links in a separate column and then have a password protected page or something like that where there's a view that shows the zoom links. Yeah, I could I can think of a few workarounds I think it would be helpful to just understand what would be the best case scenario of. Obviously, is the OGM site or going to have a part of it that's only for OGM, like, because there could be also a page on the OGM site with a password that then has the calendar that with all the links. That's true. That may be the simplest workaround for the for the time being, possibly, although passwording the OGM site implies rebuilding the I'm putting the OGM site probably somewhere else as well. I didn't mean to get a stuck on a on a coding issue but but I love that I love that you've got the calendar like humming thank you Vincent. That's awesome. Yeah, it was also help from. Yes, Lauren just said, yeah it was Pete, Pete, Safon, Charles. And there was one other person on our call, helping us with the calendar and Eric, all helps with the calendar. Cool, thank you. Let's go. Klaus Bentley Hank. Okay, I'm going to turn my video off because I'm still on mobile here. This has been a really interesting week because with the new administration coming in particularly with bills are the incoming Secretary of Agriculture. And NGOs, this this consortium of NGOs that we are have formed around regenerative agriculture. Typically for years, they have been fighting against they've been fighting against a government that has taken really unreasonable steps that they're violating the Commons. It was a fight against this bill, we're against that bill. And now all of a sudden you have an administration coming in that is in fact soliciting input and that is soliciting listening to where should we go and it's really has created it. It has created a moment of disorientation actually. What I'm advocating is let's switch from transition from against to for whatever you for, you know, and articulate this particularly. And what what you realize is that government has made decisions that are actually violating basic science. And that's true for you just think of climate change. And really a creatures example in the food world is the, the nutritional guidelines that were published in 2020, where they mandatory had a science advisory panel, and then promptly went against the explicit and written guidelines of their science advisory council publishing guidelines that were again violating basic knowledge about nutrition and the impact of nutrition on health and so on. So, it's, it's, it really is a moment in time that requires some thought on how to for NGOs on how to engage with government in a more rational science focused conversation and it also brings a lot of things into focus when you think about artificial development involving and what could it do and should it do. I mean, basically, if there was a way to find a science based argumentation where best available science is actually used as a foundation for decision making. Maybe a very necessary and also monumental shift in in developing policy. The question of course is what constitutes best available science and who gets to say what it is. So this is sort of the struggle that that is happening right now in in my world so we have spirited debates. One thing is that we are shifting focus now to support world development, and we are doing this by showing films documentaries that have been developed. I'm going to post one in a moment that by by local people, talking about how they succeeded in developing a community, very rural, very remote, small communities. And we're really the, the hot eggs are so profound and where the political base is also very right wing and very, very aggressive and very, very wounded really. So we're looking to stimulate conversations and we have been doing this in fact we have two of these following this week with with community level and they attract to 300 people to listen in. That that sort of encourage a focus away from politics and on very practical immediate steps that you can take to build local community. That's sort of what's happening in my world. It's kind of exciting to hear you describe that class because you have your feet in the ground in a really important sector. We've heard you for a long time working really hard on the sector. And all of a sudden we have an administration that's eager for input, whatever that means. And it opens up a bunch of actually much more interesting more productive questions and my heart is just like, yes, I'm happy, happy to hear your check in and want to see how GM can be helpful to figure out what is a science based policy like and how do we, and you also included empathy for people who feel now marginalized and left out and sort of probably probably frightened about what's going on which is sort of the losing side of the last election, and how to reach out to them and how to how to do this inclusively so all those things are really just delightful to me and I want to figure out how do we marshal ourselves. Thank you for that class. Bentley Hank and Scott. So, that's probably the perfect tea up. I was going to mention that I hired a marketing firm to kind of help me get a project out and start getting some feedback on it. I may have mentioned before called goalie bot, and it's express purpose is to help people come to rational group decisions, kind of build agreement. And it does that by having people kind of put forth their evidence and way the evidence in a shared mathematical model. It kind of forces you to think through why you believe what you believe and then display it. So it's built to address those specific issues. So class if you have any debates that someone might have some time to put through the and stress test the system. That would be helpful. And then anyone else that's interested in either learning more or amplifying this experiment would be appreciated. Can you explain just a little bit more. What golly about does what the what the conversation is like with this bot because I think that the more people understand how it works the easier will be able to find places where you can test it. I'm just struggling a bit with the explanation but right now goalie is analyzing should we should as an individual kind of take the take the vaccine for COVID right. So there's a lot of people concerned about that. So he or it's not really he it's a net it. You can kind of feed it with some of the major pros and cons and it uses math and looks at it the way a naive child would probably look at a situation say okay you have these two pros these two cons and if they're all equal weight than they wait than they equal each other out and then people are invited to add information to this naive gullible robot and as they do that then they're kind of forced to think about well why would I convince this five year old that they should take the vaccine. And so you put in evidence into the system and then there's a way to counteract evidence saying that's bad evidence or doesn't relate by putting in more evidence. And then it just uses math to add that up where we use heuristics to add that up in our brain, but it's doing explicitly and shows the numbers so you can see this fact. It adds to the top result we're going about believes or doesn't believe in this claim, based on this evidence then you have an opportunity to go in and add more evidence on why it shouldn't so it, it encourages people to be explicit about why they think something is true or isn't true. Russian rationality processor. Yeah, yeah, and it does it on Twitter so it's completely open. Wow. Now right, right now it's completely manual, except for the math bit it does the calculations but someone's going to have to be behind goalie bot always be polite so everyone who gets something in he'll say oh thank you for that fact and that's the thing is gullible you can say whatever you can say it's up to other people to come back and say why that's wrong. If people start saying nonsensical stuff to it I'm just going to say oh air I didn't understand please rephrase, repeat that. And my question to you is going to be gully means gullible right. Yeah, yeah, and it's really interesting to hold an innocent gullible artifact in the middle of the conversational space. It helps to shift people's attention because then it's not a confrontation with someone else who might shame you or embarrass you or whatever. And in fact if they're just sort of gullible then whatever you know it's a little bit like, it's a little bit like phoning into QVC or something like that. You know, but the person who takes your call on the other end and is trying to sell you the cubic zirconium, their job is to make you sound as fun and cool as possible they are clearly not going to undermine you in any way at all this is the best 15 minutes of fame you're ever going to get right so it's kind of a safe interaction and I like that a lot. Yeah, so it's kind of it kind of bypasses some of the emotional triggers and helps people kind of focusing on the rational side. It makes it more playful and less confrontational. What's divisive. Thank you. Julian. So, I guess, being cynical here, but we came right from a classes check in where we talked about the starting turnabout of having an administration that science based and actually listens to people. And I'm thinking that we have evidence from last four years that people don't make decisions based on rationality. So if you have something that's processing something for rationality. So what's going to be different about getting it to work. Well, people do make some decisions rationally and they make other decisions not because the level of effort. So if we can bring down the level of effort to make a rational decision then more decisions hopefully would be rational. That's the hypothesis. So nothing's a cure for everything but if we can make it easier, then it might increase the agreement and the rationality. That's the theory. A couple thoughts on that. People and I just typed them in the chat people tell box stuff they won't tell other humans like with with Eliza and some of the very earliest completely crude conversational systems. Researchers were shocked to discover that they were so hugely popular like people really sort of said or engage and talk with them. And that people were sort of much more confessional with these devices than normal. So there might be openings to ask difficult questions that people can can think about on their own time in their own space in their own way. But if golly bot can lead towards some open ended questions that are very difficult to process with conversational AI, like like you're so you're quickly out of your depth in the ability to respond automatically, but you could be actually opening up tremendous thinking and being space for people who are engaging with it. That might be interesting. I hadn't thought of that that's very interesting. I love chat bots because they're tireless they're inexpensive you can keep making them better. And they have all these funny attributes that they're kind of like a person but kind of not. Right, and they'll take. It's a little bit like people who have children with autism, discovering that Alexa and Google assistant and all those things are actually really really really good companions, because they're tireless they don't mind repetition. All those kinds of things right and then how to hack that for for good I think is interesting. Yeah. So thank you very much that like cool stuff. Hank Scott Linda. Yeah, so I think my checking will be quick I think I've just been thinking a lot about. I mean some of the comments that I made last last week which were just about. You know, people kind of taking mental shortcuts in a lot of ways and becoming kind of mechanical and the things that they say and the ways that they, they act and following the crowd and I have just been really reflecting on my efforts to actually like engage and really difficult discussions that actually lead to some kind of at least the start to coming up with some, you know, kind of fixes to some of these big issues that we brought up on this call and that just kind of like occur in life right. And I just have kind of noticed that, you know, a lot of my friends and me to you know use a lot of just kind of like tags right like the Black Lives Matter defund the police etc etc and we say these things and make a lot of these like implicit assumptions in our heads that they're talking about the same thing that I'm talking about because we're both kind of speaking the same language but there's this hesitancy to actually dig deep into explaining like oh what do I actually mean by that what do you actually mean by that like what are the real issues that we see here so we can we can kind of start reading reaching some kind of you know convergence and you know, not really like gunning for right or wrong answers just really uncovering like what are we actually trying to say with these you know monikers. And I think I've just been really surprised the hesitancy for people to actually like engage really deeply in those conversations because they're tough right like you know some some of them can be offensive and you like don't want to find out that your friend thinks something that different than you sometimes, but it's just been it's it's been a challenge for me to. And so that's really been been where my where my head's at this week and again just like I one of the reasons why I love this space is, I feel like I could call any of you guys and have those tough conversations, partially because we probably just never met in person. But anyway yeah that that's that's kind of where I've been at so. Yeah thank you are you mostly dealing with people you know or would be in in repeated contact with or are you trying strangers to. I would say more people that I'm in closer contact with because it's easier for me to just kind of be like hey can we like it's easier for me to get their time right. I've tried some strangers and have had previous conversations with strangers which had kind of like. There's there's a level of like fearlessness that comes with talking to somebody that you don't know where you're like hey well like I have nothing to lose by just being myself and saying what I think right. You know, given the environment outside some, you know, sometimes it's harder to just have random conversations but anyway sorry, Jerry. Oh don't be sorry at all. There's a guy I back on patreon he has a show he calls like let's chat. And he goes and he sets up a card table outside of flea market or a church or whatever else. In I think relatively conservative towns, and he basically puts up a sign and he has nice video cameras and nice microphones and he'll interview people, but he's always doing strangers. And what's interesting is that you may be, it may be easier for you to book the appointment to have the conversation, but having the conversation may open up this whole relationship risk thing. They may be unwilling to unpack because if they told you what they really thought they might lose you as a friend or something or something else right or there might be ashamed of what they think even though they think it. Who knows what like there's a thousand things in there that are interesting and powerful. But that in the chat. Which one the let's chat I just put in the in the chat. Oh good. There's a there's a brain link to let's chat in my brain where you'll see the YouTube channel he's got very interesting guy named Ty Wells Tyrone Wells. Thank you. Cool, let's go. Thank you. Thank you. Scott Linda Pete. Okay, I'm close. Thank you for that discussion of science I'm going to paraphrase this. So I what I heard was science as a current set of best available information, something along those lines. And I think one of the challenges we're having is that we're thinking of people who aren't thinking of science or maybe others like are in the space of science as a, as a set immutable fact that is this is a thing I learned at once and that's what it is and we all know exactly what that is. And I think the more you look into it the more you realize, that's what we know right now. And then next week we might, we might adjust that a little bit based on new information and what we're adding to it is science based, but it's not. It's adding to and changing and updating. And it's a living thing as opposed to a, a set piece and I think that's kind of a, it's an important point that I'm not sure that that we all grasp in the sense of you know why don't they know what we should do. Well because it's evolving. So anyway, I thank you for that, that inspiration that is giving me some things to think about. Second thing of three. So rational, I just did a quick look up of words because I love my words, rational based on or in accordance with reason or logic. Okay, so here we have a rational decision. So rational, put a little E on the end of it. Now, it's a set of reasons or logical basis for a course of action or a particular belief. So now what's happened is we have a set of reasons for a belief, as opposed to if you're thinking logically about making a rational decision that is antithetical to a rationale for your decision. And I think that that's, that's important because the people who are making the decisions, do not think they're thinking illogically, or irrationally, they are thinking they have a rationale for what they are, what they're thinking. I think that's important to to understand where the, the set of reasons because there is a reason. It's not just they pulled it out of the air there's reason. So the third thing it's a question for all of you and something that I've been working on with my thinking sales program. And TAO, Dow. What does that mean to you, does that mean, does that spark philosophy, or does that spark religion. And I like a way of thinking or a doctrine. And I just like a show of fingers. So, Dow, does that mean way of thinking philosophy. Do you have any hands up for that. Okay, and how many people think that that's that sounds like Taoism that's actually like a religion or a or a doctrine. It's also a religion or a doctrine, I mean Taoism is based on that. What I was trying to see was in my agnostic set of thinking tools, if that word to indicate the balance between the new and the known is is has as connotations that come with it that I don't. I don't want to break because it's such a wonderful word to capture that that thought. You know, the word I've been using before was balance. I'm wondering if Dow actually makes, makes more sense. And overall, I saw more philosophy by a long shot. So that kind of helps me, I'm just not sure. But that was the only question that I had. I will keep thinking about it. Thank you all. Thank you. I think, for me, Dow raises complex issues pretty quickly. It's a profound and lovely word. And I'm not sure that six people would interpret it in two ways. I think they might interpret it in six ways. So it might be very complicated to include. So I'm thinking that I have the, the Dow philosophy is built into this one set of three thinking tools as part of my structure. But I don't think I need to use that word, because I think the word brings with the things that I don't necessarily want to have. It's a philosophy built into it. If you understand what that is fine, but you don't have to, to, to understand the balance between the new and the note. Okay. That helps me. Thank you. Thank you. Linda Pete Doug. And you're muted. You're somehow muted Linda you're muted on both devices. I think one of them is your phone and it's in your phone is muted and the other one is your zoom on your laptop, and that one is actually muted through zoom. And one of them will liberate you in a moment. And I love that you have redundant systems going here. Think she said pass in the comments. Oh, sorry. Okay. As soon as you figure out to get to get your voice back in, you're welcome to test it and we'll come back to you. All right, now let's go Pete Doug George. So what did John Gaul say, redundant systems fail redundantly, something like that. Good morning all. This has been a fruitful and productive week in the kind of sense making about what OGM is for me lots of productive conversations, lots of interesting thinking and, and stuff. And I apologize for not having a way to encapsulate that better than, than what I just said, actually, I did have a little show and tell and this is actually kind of cruel for me to do, I think. But I, I, in conversation with somebody I drew an ugly picture and so this, I carry this as a little token of, I actually did stuff this week. This is also the week that OGM and Federation Kiko lab and metacogs and things like that took enough of my week that in that I actually blew off a couple days of real work paying work. And, and had to tell one of my primary clients, you know, I'm sorry look these there's a couple days in my week that aren't aren't available to you anymore, because I'm off on this. This new exciting grand and wonderful adventure, which I think is going to start to balance the income maybe someday I can see a path forwards for that or actually I can see a path forward I can see light at the end of the tunnel. A couple things top of mind. Actually, Scott, Scott talking about science and the way people think about it. I'm going to put this in the chat instead of going talking through it in the, in the interest of time. So I'll skip that one put it in chat. This week, the flotilla project flotilla group, which is interested is a guild pod project working on directories and matchmaking. It's me and Vincent and a few other folks. We're going to have our first kind of open, you know, open office hours working session thing tomorrow. We've got 90 and Pacific noon Eastern 1800 CET. You're welcome to join I we've, well, I won't say more. There's a matter most group also tools for connectors if you want to kind of chat whether or not it's even worth you coming to flotilla. We're pushing hard on having directories of people and directories of projects within OGM Kiko lab things like that, kind of like the shared calendar but for people and projects. Another thing that's alive for me this this yesterday and this morning is something that ended up getting called the emergent events since making Stefan cruiser on matter most actually in in what I thought was a wonderful way of matter most actually working for us mentioned something in the off topic channel. He said, yo, I'd like to, I'm going to say it in in California ease instead of Stefan's more erudite language. Yo, it'd be fun to talk about this GameStop short squeeze thing and try to do some sense making about it. And back and forth with me and him and a few other people. It ended up being that we could kind of conceive of, you know, there's these big hairy situations the 2008 stock crash or 911 or or coven 19 responses. There's a lot of like too much information and it's all very complicated and wound together and and now in this day and age. It's also true that you've got various actors pushing really hard on the information space to distort it and warp it and things like that. So it feels like it's a small effort at this point. But just just taking the next step to say hey, why don't we actually like think about this and do this and do it as a thing and draw diagrams or make slow models or things like that. And so I called it this all the details of this are on the list and actually also on the forum, and there's a new channel on matter most. Not to overwhelm anybody you don't need to find all of those you just need to find one of them and it will point you in the right place. But it there's two things for me one of them the topic itself is very interesting. And it was also something that bubbled out of the Mellu of OGM and and the associated things around it. It came out of the network this idea that this would be a thing that you could actually do and it would be valuable and useful. I also want to shout out to Ken. So Ken's question on the list, you know, you'll Pete this is awesome thank you for posting this Twitter thread and I actually can't read it because it's, you know, all like jumbles of words. If there were a picture of that, then I could actually, you know, tell what that was going on. So that was that was the impetus for me to meet Stefan's, you know, other he's he's got a personal interest and he's done a ton of research and digging into the various information streams that he can find and some of them he went pretty deep and in interesting places. But anyway, it's like there's there's a thing there and it was cool that this emerged this effort could emerge out of the thing that we're doing with OGM. And it surprised me because it was like, you know, three days ago I didn't really even think that this was a practice or a community of practice that somebody would join up in. And now a couple days later it's like, yeah, this is actually a really good emerging practice. I can even see this would be an amazing consulting team, you know, we've got, we've we're starting to get the, you know, the practice and tools and things like that. For like a big financial company, you know, they could ask somebody like us, you know, hey, what's this thing all about and how do we make sense of it and I can actually see as putting together the operating system for that kind of thing. So that was super excited. So again, flotilla Friday, I'll put some links for that and other stuff in the shop. Pete, thank you. And I just tripped across Stefan's comments about the emergent events since making this morning before, before getting on this call so I'm eager for that and part of I think what he said was, man, we're OGM we should be sitting here like visualizing this and really diving deep and offering the world a great visualization of things like the GameStop short squeeze. And I didn't even have a chance to answer a piece of my answer was, you're completely correct and I'm sitting here mapping it I put a link to my brain for it, you know, here, I'm mapping it in my own tool in my own way, and not even having that conversation publicly other than if somebody stumbles across it. I would love to have ways in which many of us curate this thing in public view. I think that's a that's a, an OGM practice that would get us attention that would be completely fulfilling to those of us who are obsessive about tracking stuff mapping stuff linking stuff. You know, turning the soil on all these things and it could be useful to a whole bunch of other projects, whether it's education or debate or in discourse or whatever else some. So you're right is there's something very, very juicy and nutritious like in the middle there that's forming up. And I want to mention real quick also one of the tools as I've been thinking as I've been thinking about Ken's question actually. There's a fairly old discipline and set of set of computer tools for systems dynamic dynamic dynamic systems modeling. You can set up stocks and flows and have a view of a system, you know, if you kill off the, the CN enemies then you know this affects other. So you can draw system diagrams in lots of different ways. The story I have for this is actually literally back in the 90s I think I was talking to a practitioner that used an old tool, probably Stella or I think. And, and they were trying to set of consultants were trying to explain to the board of and the, and the CEO afford motor company. What was going on in the world that impacted their, you know, their thing and what happened in the conversation was, each board member had their own view of the world, and they were all yelling at each other and fighting and nobody, you know, and the CEO couldn't couldn't tell heads from tails right. So the systems dynamic modeler came in and said, Okay, tell me a little bit about, you know, your, your, the providers of, you know, the people where where where your stocks and flows right. Who are your suppliers, who are your sinks, you know what, how do, how are they all connected. And so over the course of a day or two they've, they modeled this in a way that then the whole team could go on to this, you know, dorky little computer 1990s screen and fiddle with buttons right and you can say, Oh, if we fiddle with the buttons, all the ways that we were thinking of fiddling with the buttons, you know, make, end up making a starved to death, you know, so the one or two people who had the right way of kind of thinking about it could finally explain to other people. Here's how this system works. And here's why we wouldn't, you know, market things this way or here's what how we have to invest our suppliers better or things like that. And so and then magically the CEO was and and the rest of the team was able to see the right thing to do and and went on to do it. So that's the story I have for a system dynamics balling there's a new, a new web based thing called insight maker that I'm excited to try out. And I want to thank Mark Antoine for finding it for me. Also, the Bucky Fuller ran something in 1961 called the world game that was then run again later when we actually had personal computers and a whole bunch of other stuff, and a friend of a friend of mine a friend of multiple several of ours to Wayne Hendricks was at both of these events. And these events are really cool because they're about experimenting with data they're about conversations in a room they're about negotiations a whole bunch of things happen in these games. And I think it much like Van of our bush or Doug angle Barts visions or Ted Nelson. These are these are inspiring visions to a lot of people who are busy inventing how we might do this in the future. So imagine the things we're talking about here being part of an ongoing world game that people could participate in they could spawn and fork and do themselves in their in their neighborhoods whatever it might be or it could be the neighborhood game or I don't know, but but I think all of these things are now much more feasible than they were when they were first prototype when they were first tested. Yeah, exactly. Thanks Gil. So Linda if you'd like to jump in I'd love to just have you jump in a bit since you seem to have conquered the audio thing. And, although I'm not hearing. There we go. There you are. Well, this has been very pertinent for me a lot of the topics today about nutrition and the frequent changes in nutritional science and it's not small course corrections it's like one day they'll say one thing and then years down the road they'll say the opposite. It's not a small correction. So wine animal fat. Pardon me. Salt wine animal fats. Yeah. Exactly. And that gives a lot of people. They started discounting science because they see these reversals people who don't really have much understanding of how science works and so yeah that's one thing that happens. And another thing that I see that I've seen happen about 20 something years ago I got involved in building a co housing community. It was like 12 middle class people who built a four and a half million dollar project. We were always about to lose the project for years on and there were so many difficulties permitting. And we pulled it off and I lived there for 20 years or so. But decisions are made by groups of people with anything but rationality. I mean that's the way it works in the model that is not the way it works in practice and so systems like the way this group works it's very interesting to me you're a magnificent facilitator by the way Jerry I really appreciate. Thank you. You do. But yeah that's just what I bring to this is that real world experience with a group of everyone who's so idealistic and try so hard but you have virtue signaling you have people who's all with great values but their highest value is different and often conflicting. So there you go. Thank you everybody for letting me listen to your activities and thank you. Thank you so much I really appreciate it. And some comments a little bit earlier made me realize that when very conservative or religious people are coming in and listening to conversations about how science should run things. They may well be interpreting things as commandments or as truths from a religious sense and as immutable when in fact the healthy scientific mind is pretty flexible and permeable. This doesn't always actually play out this way in science. But still the goal is the scientific method is moving toward and as new realities show up and sometimes this takes a generation to wash through. But we science is meant to evolve is meant to be sort of toward a moving a moving target of explaining the world better and figuring things out. And how to crack that aspect of the conversation seems important to me. Because I think that I hadn't realized that a lot of people who are rejecting science may well be rejecting it because they see it as coming in with alternative truths. When in fact what it's coming in with is a process. I don't know how to make that clear and present that I don't really know. Let's go Doug George Kim. Okay. I want to talk about how you got a group to deal with uncomfortable basic assumptions that they don't want a question. So my, I've got two examples. The first is I deal with a group of economists. They default to the view that growth is absolutely essential on question. And the problem with growth is that in the economy that we have all the fruits of it go to the rich. That's not distributed. And that actually makes a disparity worse. Another thing about growth is all growth uses energy. You can't avoid it. And more energy put into the environment tends to contribute to global warming. So there's good reasons to question growth and see if there is a new way of organizing society that is fruitful, fun to live in and with less growth. And that conversation is just very, very hard to have with economists because it's built into their DNA through the I think primarily through the career ladder process. So that's really interesting to me how do you do that how often do you raise the question how do you get them engaged and that when they've got a lot of other things they think they should be thinking about. The second example is much more difficult. And that is, and this is interesting because John came, Kenny was in the same meeting with me last night. John Kelly. And that is how you get people default to wanting to beat up on the Trump supporters. They are stupid. They are in a bubble. They are uneducated. My view is that while there's some truth to that, we also are somewhat uneducated, somewhat stupid. And there's a certain parity there. And that they argument that they are stupid avoids dealing with the fact that people like us help create the conditions that led to Trump. And we've got to learn to deal with that. These are concrete things that came up in last night. One has to do with voting machines. Trump is crazy to question the voting machines. Well, I remember back about 10 years ago when people like us were convinced that the voting machines can all be hacked because they had software. And we helped create the environment that Trump uses. There are just so many things that are like that. Take for example, the problem that we face is 11. Well, 10 and a half million people more voted for Trump in 2020 than in 2016. That's a very uncomfortable fact for us. Why are they doing that. What's going on there. When people say that Trump is crazy to believe the election was stolen. Hey, wait a minute. All were part of thinking that Bernie Sanders lost out to the Democratic National Committee's machinations. And the primary was stolen from Bernie. So the Democrats have a candidate, which only exists because the party was stolen. It's the difficulty of getting progressives to get off of beating up on Bernie supporters and avoiding their own causal relationship to creating the conditions that led to Bernie in the first place. So that's just a very difficult conversation to have. It's not only somewhat about facts, but it's also about the flow of the feelings that connect facts. And I don't know quite what to talk about. I mean, down in a way that was implicit and all this. So anyway, those are, and I have one further thing on my mind, which is totally different. And that is, I noticed that when most of you talk when it's here to do your debrief. You look at your camera. I find that very difficult for myself. For this reason, I'm used to lecturing and when I lecture, I'm following the body language of the group. The little zoom windows break up the bottle body language of the group so it's not a coherent thing. So I find that looking into the room while talking like I am now is painful. So I want to turn away. And I wonder if anybody else has an experience at all like that. Anybody. And for me it's the difficult conflict is wanting to look at the little windows because I want to see as much of the eyes and the body language as I can get through zoom. I want to look at the camera so that it looks to you like I'm looking at you. And I haven't found a configuration that lets me do both so now it's kind of a practice to force myself to look at the camera, which also has a ring light behind it so I'm getting too much light in my eyes. When I'm apparently looking at you so it's you know it's a fail right now I don't know what I don't we do about it. You could just duct tape a selfie stick to your head and keep that out ahead of you all the time. Yeah. And of course you know we're missing not just my body language or missing pheromones and all sorts of other stuff that we don't get in you know in real life but this is what we have. And the hugs yeah. Yeah. Pete Vincent class. One of the things whenever something like this comes up one of the things that really fascinates me is that is how different everybody's cognitive abilities and cognitive deficits kind of are, and we think we're all the same and everybody sees pretty much the same so okay well there's the shy people and the boisterous people and it's actually a lot more nuanced than that and there's a lot of variants and a lot of you know weird things. So I find it interesting Doug that that it's not easy or not pleasant to look at a zoom screen for you for me just just as a reaction. It actually works pretty well for me and I get most of this is going to sound weird probably but I get, you know, 50% of the body language kind of of an in room meeting through through a zoom window. You know so maybe that means when I'm face to face, I'm missing out on a bunch of stuff or maybe, maybe I've been working with screens and stuff I have been working with them for, you know, a couple of decades kind of interacting with things and people and stuff like that on a screen so I'm really faced to it and I talk screen really well. I have kind of an opposite problem. One of the things. It's one of one of the things that I do that that would be rude if most people were doing and I hope it's not rude when I do is that having having the camera right here and the zoom window right here and a whole bunch of other windows. It makes me get a lot of bandwidth for bringing information into the meeting right and, and I feel like I don't think this is actually true but I feel like it's less rude than if I'm doing that, you know, in person in person there's a lot more pressure for I have a little bit of neurocognitive divergence. So, in a room I'm trying to be polite with other people I'm trying to act like other people act when you're in, you know, in concert with people I try to be present on. I let myself go a little bit and I interact a lot more with, you know, I've got browser windows and, and transcripts and, and emails and chat things going on. And I'm pretty good at synthesizing all of that into a channel, you know, and putting it in chat or something like that. I also kind of know that the, you know, the cheat that I'm doing or that I'm allowing myself to do that and I'm sure that I appear distracted to some people that, you know, Pete's multitasking he's actually not listening when I probably am pretty listening pretty good most of the time. The other thing I've noticed is, I'm pretty sure I watch myself on chat now and I'm smiling less than I think I would in a meeting. So I go to resting bitch face, rather than the performative stuff that I would do in person to make it look like I, you know, my, my emotional, you know, communication and stuff like that is like everybody else you know I learned over the course of, you know, my life. You know, hey smile, you know, look at people when they're talking. And I think all that stuff is really important and I'm, and I do some of that naturally. When I'm face to face with people I, and I've learned that I do some of it of performatively I've learned to perform how to, you know, to be engaged with people just so other people think I'm engaged when my normal mode of engagement is probably a lot more the way I look on zoom, kind of like always distracted and always doing something but actually paying fairly close attention to what's going on to so. I resemble that Pete. Yeah. Dang quickly Vincent cost Scott. So, I actually want to respond to Doug's first point more, which, like, so I've read to I've read this book winners take all recently that talks about this a lot it's like the whole purpose of the book and also a podcast called Revolution. Now, which I'll post link to, and there were two main threads that I wanted to comment on so one is our privilege. If we happen to be like lucky enough to be in this call and have the time to actually like talk about these ideas. Our privilege in a way insulates us from engaging with the root causes of the inequality and the issues like climate change, because like it's it's a bias where we feel like, oh we like worked to like get where we are. So other people should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and like work harder. And it's, even if we just got lucky, because we were put into a certain life and some people may have not been put into a great life and then worked hard and got lucky and that paid off. And they were here and so I think there's a bias in our privilege where we just think that other people can do what we did. It's not really reality. And I think the other thing is there's a bias about if someone successful in the current system they make a lot of money. I think there's a dogma that companies and startups are and are the best way to create impact and it's the way to make the most impact on the world. And so there's more of a tendency to like make a lot of money and then use the profits to donate to another company to solve a problem where it might be the case that the system is the cause of the problem. So it's like not seeing the issue with practices that make philanthropy necessary. And so it's like if you know there's like I see stories about people touting like a little girl for like selling lemonade to pay for cancer treatment and I'm like, isn't it kind of messed up that we have to do that in the first place like yes that's great but we have to think about like you know and it's like somebody who is there was a story and winners take all somebody who had like a cigarette company that made a lot of money selling cigarettes and marketing the cigarettes that were like way worse than other cigarettes. And they were spending the profits to donate to hospitals. So wouldn't that your effort just be better spent just not selling cigarettes, like you probably have more of an impact just not doing anything. So, yeah, it's hard to see that though. If we're privileged and also we've been the people who are successful from the system don't see what's wrong with it. Yeah, you just opened up like eight cans of good worms go ahead. I would also come back to duck's comments at the first first part of his office comments and there isn't an element that you didn't mention which is that we really live in an era of information warfare. I mean information has been weaponized for several decades already. And in our reality, we are still in some form of the Civil War today. It's just not being fought out in the streets and it's not a shooting war but it's about information and and that is that is designed to influence people's behavior. And the outcome is as impactful as a real war, right, because it shifts the direction of our national economy. When you think about climate change and when you think about the disinformation campaigns, you know, the legitimate the legitimizing of science, the scientific process. It's not just that we have to be a rational in on the number of great fan of spiral dynamics and so on. But no, there is an additional element where where you have to start neutralizing disinformation before then inserting what we think is rational truth. And that is really, I think, the challenge of our time. In my primary class, I put a really important link in my brain into the chat which is that we are already in a nonlinear war. This was this the light bulb went off for me when I watched Adam Curtis's documentary hyper normalization. And he's like, Hey, look, this is happening, this is happening, this is happening. And, you know, whether it's election influencing or disinformation or Q and on or whatnot, we are way deep down that thing. It's just an undeclared war can thank you very much. I will, I will do that I have to boogie at two minutes of to join a different zoom my apologies but this this call can keep going until we're done. Scott then Judy. So the part about Doug's, Doug's wonderfully enthusiastic contributions that stuck with me was the question about the desire to turn away from the screen. And what I'd like to address about that is, as fundamentally social creatures, a face is feedback. That's fundamentally what your face is from another person's perspective it is a feedback. Continue what you're doing. Don't continue what you're doing. That's a good thing I like that. No, I'm just disagreement. Feedback includes judgment. And so the intensity of having for 16 on my screen, all looking at me, but small. It's like you're all in the back of the auditorium. And, and because there's no one in front of you, I'm kind of separated in a sense of thinking, you know, like what are what are they all up to, and I want to look around, because I want that like, okay, keep smiling at me I've seen that I've seen that face. It makes me feel good it makes me feel like, keep going, this is good, or I'm looking at someone else who's who's over here, they might be focusing, but they're, they're not paying attention. They're all feedback mechanisms for me, and the intensity of it, especially as someone who's more introverted of having everyone look at me is, it's a lot. The second part that's kind of somewhat related is it's really hard to take this all in and one, and we see motion. I'm always seeing motion and when you see motion, you don't even think you just look, you know, your, your activation systems like are built to see things moving. And so all of that combines to be a really intense experience. And so you'll see what I'm talking a lot of times. Oh, I think this, and it's because I, I can't take all this information in and make my own thought at the same time. Yeah. Thank you. Judy. I think it's really important that we recall that when we're trying to communicate with people. The first initiative actually has to be inviting them to share and listen, because if that doesn't happen first, anything else is kind of a lost effort. In order to do that, I think we need to polish our skills at learning from them their framework so that we can interact effectively with them in their framework to help them see other dimensions that they're not seeing. And this is a, it's an enabling skill, it's a facilitation skill, but people don't sort and take in facts that are inconsistent with their beliefs without there being an opening of some sort. And if there's anything that OGM and the things we're trying to do can do to get at that fundamental dimension of entry and engagement. That would be a tremendous contribution. Must go. Thank you for saying that that those are great fast words for me to hear in this call. I need to hop off. Also, so thanks folks. All right, so, Judy, if you can hold on for one second. I actually sent this to Jerry a while ago there's a film of think it's somebody's last name is clear he does this, this newsletter called real court communications. He said when we're trying to work with people who have very hard and boundaries around their thinking. It's really not very effective to engage in conversation with them but if you can give them a book, where they can sit on their own, and go, okay, I can have this dialogue with with the author about how it's challenging me. It's much less threatening and they're much more likely to come to a different arrangement in their minds. So, just one of the things of sometimes conversation is not the best way to change somebody's mind but to just let them go off and and study something on their own. I love that idea, but I would also suggest that attention spans are such that books are not well received by broad masses of people. Something like a Rome book would be unbelievable. We need to get something that's much more short and succinct that invites engagement somehow, because the percentage of people who don't even have a book in their house is incredibly high. Judy, your type structure is phenomenal. All right, so I have been great as always. Good to see you Judy. So I've been using my little tip that I found out about zoom where I can arrange windows where I've put everybody who's spoken up top and I now know who exactly who has not gone so it is George than me and then we'll go to john Kelly. Okay, thank you. Let's start. Oh my I feel like my mind is just going crazy. I have been using Twitter as a kind of market research tool. My background relevant relevant relevant to some of the things that was said today is that I was the inventor of the telephone focus group. So I about in 1972 or so. So I've done over 8000 teleconference focus groups, mostly without video. I've done a few thousand into in face focus groups. And I can talk a lot about the difference between face to face and audio only and all of that. What I really want to talk about is the idea that in in Twitter what I've, I've tried a whole lot of different things over the last few months coming up on about 1000 followers. She's not bad not not fabulous but not bad. I'm seeing that the most receptive thing in my area of mind skills mental effectiveness skills. What's being reacted to the most is something that kind of really took me by surprise. Maybe we'll take you by surprise. I've got something and I think we all have something that I call expert blindness, an expert knows almost everything there is to know about a certain field, except for one thing, what it's like to know nothing. Okay, see a lot of nods. So, it takes a lot of training. It's not that you can't see from the beginner's mind. It's that it takes a lot of training and work and really hard work. And what I found is, I have been constructing models of thinking much like Scott models of thought and emotion and learning and all, all the mental events, and it's gotten very complicated, but I am astounded by the fact that if I just give people and my audience is not you kinds of people older accomplished very very finely honed thinkers. It is a lot of the 20 and 30 somethings that are starting their lives, who could benefit from the wisdom of somebody in his 70s, who has been very very successful. And thinks he knows why and thinks he knows what's transferable. Instead of a great deal of complexity, what astounds me is that a few simple steps, the Rome people have taken to calling it patterns. But a good example of that is what was mentioned before the scientific method. If you Google scientific method, you will see six simple steps. We all know that each of those steps could be in it could be and has been a book or a gigantic body of literature. How you do each of those steps is very different in physics versus biology versus all the other sciences, and all the things that we debate whether their sciences are not like economics, which I don't think is a science, but and psychology which some people consider to be poetry. But, but the. So, if when I when I come up with six or eight or four simple questions to ask for problem solving decision making, how to set your goals, how to get clarity on a concept. Those kinds of things are being received astoundingly well on Twitter, which tells me, and I'm just not going to do anything that people on Twitter want me to do but it tells me from a market researcher point of view that this is what people are receptive to. This is what grabs him and on the old principle. Give them what give what is it promise and what they want give them what they need. Clearly people are receptive to simple steps. That seem to be to them earth shaking to us. It's like, huh, isn't that obvious. If you want to solve a problem. Isn't it obvious that you need to specify the unknown. Isn't it obvious that you need to know what the goal is. Isn't it. No, it is not obvious. And that that to me is mind blown. Maybe it's all obvious to you. It's not, not to me. I'm working on a template for how to do the impossible. My relationship with the impossible is a kind of interesting one. These books behind me. It's actually a photograph of books is about a 10th of my collection. They look very erudite, but they're actually books on their part of my, maybe a 10th of my collection of magic books. Magic, not like most other magicians. I do magic to bring people into contact with the impossible. That is to expand their view of what is what is possible. For instance, like right now. So what is what is possible brings people into the related if I can blow your mind enough. When you go back to work. Problems will look different. Problems will not be the world will be full of possibilities instead of impossibilities. So I'm working on a simple template. I mean, I can write a hundred step template. That's the easy one. I want to write the seven step template on how to do the impossible. And I want to do a 50 more of those templates so that these 20 some things can go through life and say, ah, okay, that's one of those things. And they they know to look at it and they'll see seven provocative questions to ask that they wouldn't have thought of asking, or maybe they'd have thought of asking one or two of them. And I think that'll just dramatically enhance their life. So let me stop there. I can go on but. Thanks George. You just reminded me I was at a birthday party a few years ago had a really great musician and he said okay. Okay. Can you hear me magician or magician magician. And he says okay I'm going to tell you guys I'm going to show you guys how to do this trick. And he said now it's important you recognize something just because I show you how to do this trick doesn't mean you're going to know how to do it yourself. And I just that really struck me is, you know, how often we think oh I've seen how that's done I know it but you can't replicate it yourself. So that's there is between conceptual knowledge and embodied knowledge but I have had an interesting week. I don't know if anyone is familiar with braver angels, braver angels.org. It's a group that's attempting to bring red and blue and I hate this these terms red and blue but that's what we have so people who identify as red and blue citizens together in conversations and I was part of a debate. I wasn't part of I observed a debate this week, which was really eye opening to see how many people really are in trench in their positions. I like the format of the debate because it really was very respectful. You didn't address the other person directly you spoke to the chair, you asked the chair was very firm of if you want to challenge that person need to ask them a question so you say blah blah blah you've got to say you know, I'd like to know Mr chair, if you would ask the speaker, how they came to believe that or what their evidence is for it. So it was really interesting. And then, earlier this year I ran into Ian Bremmer for the first time who runs something called G zero media he was a speaker at an event I went to. I don't ever remember the Hoover Institute really amazing speaker high energy guy, incredibly smart. And if you go to G zero. I think it's just G zero.com I'm not sure but I check in with him periodically to get his take on what's happening in the world, and I saw a video of Trump's foreign policy wins and I thought, Trump had foreign policy wins that's that's a new one for me So, I watched this video and it was really amazing he actually and he's a he's not a. He's pretty fair minded about, you know, treating people with with respect, and see I'm happy to disagree with Trump and I have on many occasions but here are some things that he actually did that were, were real wins. And I think it's important for those of us who want to reach out across the divide to actually be able to say yeah I'm aware that Trump actually did some good things and so it was kind of a personal big step for me of I absorbed some things that that Trump did well, which goes against the, you know, the past four years of demonizing him and I really just want to, I'll put the YouTube video in here it's like eight minutes or something. So if anybody's interested you can check this guy out. He's, he's pretty interesting to, to watch and listen to. So if you're interested in knowing, you know, that Trump actually did a few things. One of the things he said there was that in some regards, it happened because of the really smart people around him. In some ways it happened because if you're the leader of a nation like the United States you get lucky. And in some cases he actually had instincts that were right that he was able to act on. Just trying to broaden the ground on which we can speak with people. I'm going to shut up and move it on to john and then Gil and Mark, you just joined us so I don't see a face there but you're welcome to check in after after Gil goes john. Great. Thank you, Ken. And thank you everybody who's still here hanging out. There's a lot of things to pick up on but I want to talk about Doug's comment about how we think about the Trump supporters. And I want to introduce possibly a controversial possibly morally controversial idea that there are, there is a continuum of productive and counterproductive error in our thinking, you know, we've been talking a lot about scientific and rationality and so on and so forth. A good reference for me on this is this book called hope for democracy by john guest deal and Catherine, I think it's con block. A lot about citizen initiative review. That's something I'm very interested in you may not be interested in but the more interesting stuff is on the the kind of errors that people have in their thinking about all kinds of things public public issues and what kind of social container, they are in or they're not in that carries them along and manages them through the error. And one issue that we'd be interested in in this group it's obviously an ogm issue is how do you correct the error. That's important, really important issue. Perhaps, I'm going to suggest even more important is, is there a container that holds the person and continues to hold them through the process, even though they continue to be in error in significant error in their beliefs. And I think it's much better if we have that kind of thing. And I think that things like the citizen initiative review things like citizen juries, things like the budget game that I worked on for five years in San Jose. All of these things are big improvements, even if, and I saw this live you know I saw tea party, Trump person and progressive person on the table. And they didn't go like this because we were set up to prevent that instead it was like, are you going to put $50,000 on this thing or not. What's your solution to open to opening this library or closing this library. It was very concrete. It was very specific it was very budget oriented and the clock was running. And people made agreements, people respected each other, they didn't agree in you know in the fundamental philosophical sense, but they engaged in a process that included practical agreements which are possibly a necessary first step to the more profound cognitive social and policy agreements. And I'm taking care of an economist he said, he's a pretty well known and pretty substantial figure and he's pretty conservative, much more conservative than I am about this growth issue, you know, and the way I'm able to introduce a little bit of air in his thinking about growth is by calling, looking back into his background and time that he has spent with indigenous people. It's a very interesting process because all of his professional training is, you know, the standard standard economic way of thinking. And, but he's had some personal experience in terms of personal friendships with indigenous people that contradicts that so it's just a it's just an example of a wedge for for what Doug was talking about in terms of breaking into that growth model and getting people to think a little bit more broadly about an economy in which perhaps we took an area of life out of the growth model, either health care or food or, you know, health care food and you know, suppose those were. I don't mean that they're all uniform I don't mean that they're all completely socialized but I'm lean there's a floor at the bottom you don't fall through that floor, you're welcome to go higher but you don't fall through that floor and therefore there's no big anxious conversation about people falling through the floor what what else would that open up for us. That's a that's a great question I think for the future. All right, I have spoken. Thanks john Gil you're up. Hi thanks everybody I am, I am really struck by how much I love this community, and I thought it was because of the range of what we cover but it's really but it's also the quality and the flavor of this conversation is really unique so thank you all for that. I have a unknown number of minutes I've got to get to a doctor's appointment with Jane so let me say a couple of things just by way of reaction. Pete said something, Pete said something contrasting the zoom work we do with the real work. And in a way this is the real work and the conversations like this are actually part of the real work and it raises the challenge with Jerry said early on of how do we actually earn a living doing this. Because we're living doing that stuff to be called real work anyhow I'm interested in that melange. Jerry also said something about contrasting religion as dogma with science as inquiry. But there are schools of religion that are inquiry not dogma. And you find that in the Jewish tradition and the Muslim tradition Christian tradition and others and it's a very, very different approach and a fundamentalist will look at the Bible and say this is the revealed word of God word for word exactly in English from thousands of years and a fundamentalist of all flavors will say that, and the hermeneutic folks and in each of those traditions will say well what is this word really mean what did it mean then and what could it mean what might you infer or take from this very different approaches that is much more. It's not a scientifically structured but it's the flavor of inquiry that I think all of this value. I'm going to go back and then a little bit about what I'm up to George said that an expert can't see what it's like to know nothing is a brilliant assertion I love that. But they also can't see what they're blind to, but they themselves are blind to so different kinds of unknowns both very fertile and powerful. Briefly, Jane and I have been have been navigating the germ theory versus terrain theory of health for the last bunch of years where we're dealing with various health issues both with Western allopathic medicine treatment and Eastern acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine homeopathy and other schools so we're in that dance all the time. And for me very, very vivid this week is that my Western doc says here's a procedure that I need to do fairly soon and my acupuncture says that I would not do that if I were you. So, I'm navigating those worlds. The headline of the health story is that most of the extreme issues are behind us I've got more time and focus and I feel like I'm finally getting back in the saddle on the things that I've been focusing on and concerned with and to that are the top of the stack. One is that I've been cooking an idea for years that I keep putting down as unreasonable unrealistic for me to do and it keeps coming back and grabbing me by the shoulders and picking me up and saying you got to do this. And that's to build a family of funds focused on climate turnarounds. And I think that the essence is be ready to survive and thrive in the new world of climate crisis that we're moving into and the distinction against most activity is that the the big corporates have been doing a lot on this for years that's been where most of my work has been focused. There's enormous action in the startup world. But there's a big gap in the middle market, which is the bulk of companies in this country. They are not prepared for this and there's huge opportunity both to contribute positively and make some money as as owners of companies rather than advisors of companies so that's back on track and yesterday had my first handshake on a strategic partnership that will make this thing move from an interesting idea and deals head to an actual economic reality. So that's exciting and terrifying. I want to say more about that at a future call. And, and the other is that in Ken Ken knows this is that I've been very concerned with, well, so with building something online that builds on a community that I was nurturing early last year looking at climate and climate change. And VUCA or Bonnie is the same to make Casio is calling it. I'm really struck by how much there is of this sort of effort these days so many communities forming people trying to establish a world's same for me it's emerging out of my work with corporate and policy my systems ecology background. What's been emerging with me after a couple of several intensive years of work with Fernando Flores that has profoundly shifted how I listen, and how I listen both to other people and how I listen to myself. So my sense there's something very rich there I'm trying to give it some shape I think it includes courses and discourses and community. And as I hang out here after a long gap. And explore other things like this that other friends are doing. I'm, you know, I'm in the question of what's what's the distinctive contribution that's new that's additive that's something more than what's already there because Lord knows you know that someone said earlier in the call. We all spent all of our time zooming and doing other stuff so I'm in that question and also how do I bring a zooming experience forward that really enriches the people and concerns that I care about. And brings someone talked about the youngsters and the oldsters. And you know I'm, I'll say that I've learned a couple of things over the last 50 years of work in this realm. And share in a way that's effective and nurturing to people who may be earlier on the game or in the middle of the game or late in the game. Anyway, I've shifted from clarity to rambling so that's a signal to me to stop now. Thanks. Thank you, Scott. So something about this room I'd like to build on just quickly we were talking about this in another group I was in. I said, I have been saying variations of the same thing for months, as I am working on this program and I kind of share a little bit I get a reaction. Every time I share it, I say something a little different. And it gets me closer to something that means, Oh, this is my message. I get that. And what we were debating about was, I'm talking to a computer. And if I go in the living room and by myself, I can just talk because you're not responding responding with your faces but you're not really actually saying anything. And yet it's fundamentally different. If I was sitting on my couch, talking to the air, I would not be articulating and refining my message in the same way. And I thought that there's, it's just so important for me to have a group of people who are willing to let me think out loud over every week, because I'm learning about myself. I'm learning about what I'm building. And, you know, adjacent to that it helps keep the, I want to say keep the lonely away in some way, but it's bigger than that. I can get in my own head and live in my own little world and build these wonderful models and they're perfect and they're, they haven't interacted with reality, which is you. And that's so essential to be able to say here. And then have you say, Good. But what about this? And it just, or even just saying it helps me, helps me refine it. So I think the value of the zoom calls to me is, it's, it's just your presence, which is, which is just an odd thing that that changes what I'm saying, and makes it better. So, Thanks, Scott. Mark, welcome. Thanks for joining us. Good morning. I'm joining you from the inner sunset of San Francisco. This is my first OGM zoom call. I can't make it at eight o'clock. I take it it did start at eight o'clock today. It did. It did. We're running late. We usually wrap by 930, but glad you were able to make it and see, share what you'd like to share. I'm sure. So I am a longtime researcher in cognitive science and collaboration tools. I know John Kelly. I was just looking in my notes, which I call MX after a mind experiment. And seems I met Gil friend on a rat on around May 27, 2018, hiking. Bobby's hiking to the next level up and we talked about Stafford beer and I'm certainly have a cybernetics history background. The books behind me are one tenth of my books as well. Basically, a lot of their cognitive science to kind of develop a cognitive art. I've been taking notes building a very closed very non global very local mind. And at the moment I've got about 2.3 million unique text rings with about 13 million links behind them. I've met Jerry and certainly Jerry knows I've been doing this since 1984. Not sure exactly what open global mind is, but certainly I am very passionate about mimics related tools. I work at the Internet Archive. I'm on disability. At the moment, healing from a cancer that the chemo loses the hair but that's going successfully. And I'm not exactly myself at the moment, but I've been poking around engaging in private conversations with people at OGM and attempting to figure out what it is. I posted in the decentralized web thread. As a member of the Internet Archive, I'm familiar with Wendy Hanamura and she put she has a link in the chat. Well, not she, but the Internet Archive and she and the decentralized web movement have a meet up. It happens to be Thursday. It starts at 11. I posted the link in the chat. That's all for me right now. Just dipping a toe in. Usually on Thursdays I can't make it. I'm just going to make a small attempt to join from the beginning. Well, thanks very much for joining with us, Mark. I don't know, you may not be your usual self, but self. You are seems pretty cool to me, so glad you brought him forth today. And are you on the OGM forum? I am on the OGM forum. There you can find some videos Jerry's done about roles and guilds and things like that. I will not attempt to say what OGM is because although I've been a member from the onset here I don't really have a way of framing it up very neatly. Maybe anybody else want to take a shot at that Scott you got to get away or Vincent. Well, it's an evolving thing. It started when Jerry had collected 400,000 thoughts in a software program and then decided that he wouldn't be cool if I connected those with someone else's. And then it just kind of well who else would I connected with and then we started to collect. And we turned into a weekly meeting that we would have just very much like this, which then turned into the more action oriented people of our group saying, This is fun. What can we do. What if we actually made some things happen, and then it started to expand and that and at that point we are trying to determine how we fractionate. And the latest vision is that we have a federation which is a group of so kind of autonomous, but connected entities who are all heading out on quests and trying to make things happen. So we have a group together to share tools and experiences and encouragements and fellowship. And there are other calls mark there's a there's a Tuesday call string committee call. So I suggest you just connect the Jerry find out or Vincent you were you're doing the calendar. Friday call that I'm aware of that Peter Kaminsky. I forget exactly what it's called. I think it's the flotilla call for Friday. Mark should be part of the medicogs group. Yeah, and also Kiko lab on Mondays Mondays at noon so I'm in center fell so we're practically neighbors here, but and gills over in Berkeley and john is in Berkeley. So we have and and Doug is up in Duncan's mill so there's, you have the cadre of cause people here. Jack Park and a number of people who are very, very young who are building their own men X's, including a founder of Rome and the founder of what is it idea flow. So, I've been around the community for for a good while and the Internet archive of course is a great connector of folks so. Yeah, Gil mentioned Fernando floris and the structure of communication. So long as we can keep it human is absolutely amazing work and. Yeah, just hope to continue to meet people and connect and improve our integration. All right. Thank you all for being here we're going to wrap now. Scott I'll hang out with you for a few minutes to talk about that other thing that we want to talk about. And see as many of you as possible next week have a great week stay safe stay healthy and stay human. Can, can it's just the chat saved anywhere. It will be saved. Yes, and Jerry Jerry puts it up. I'm going to save it on my computer just to be. Let me see percent. Yeah, I'm going to save the chat on my computer in case it doesn't automatically go with the recording. Can would you do me a favor and send me a copy of that. I will. I'm on my phone. I can't see how to save it from my phone. Okay, sure. Thank you. Go ahead. Doug, I'm curious. You, you pose that question to the group about does anyone else feel that intensity of, of the faces and the people are the desire to turn away. And I'm curious after we've had some conversation about that, if you could expand on that feeling for yourself. And if you've come to any conclusions. I'm torn by the need to end the meeting. So I don't want to. But it's the kind of question that takes some meandering around because it's very experiential. But I just, it fascinates me how well most of you maintain eye contact in the, your little zoom window with me, but I'm not so able to do that. And what I find is that I can't pull the group together into a single experience of your body language, the way I could, if we were face to face. And somehow that makes me want to zoom in on one face or another, because I can't do the integration. But I don't want to do that. So I find myself feeling a funny kind of pain and wanting to, to break the contact so I can continue my own thinking. Anyway, I'm not being as coherent as I'd like to, but I'd like to raise the issue of the kind of experience we have in different kinds of groups, and to be able to talk about that. And so it strikes me as an introvert. I don't mind public speaking but one of the things that I noticed and they said in a classroom experience or in a group. You talk to one person at a time. You can really be helpful. You move around the room but you, but you, you talk to one person then you talk to another person and you continue around the room even though you're on the stage or at the pedestal or whatever. And I see how that is more difficult to take the rest of the room and make them into one chunk. You know, you have this, this you can. Yeah, you're right. It's harder to tell because we're all in different backgrounds in different spaces. It is, it is hard to define. But that helped me get a handle on it. And I'll think more about it too because it's, I think it's interesting. Excellent. Thanks Doug. Good. Hi everybody. Take care. Hi John. Hi John. Everybody. Stop the recording. Cool.