 This is the Neo Books Call on Monday, October 9th, 2023, Klaus is back from some adventures. Yeah. Any fun stories from your adventures? Well, I mean, it was an old scholar trip and I talked about it on Thursday. Yeah, it's really not much to add to that. My mind is more messed up right now because my daughter happens to be in Tel Aviv at the moment. So we've been trying to encourage her to get out, but they just started shelling the airport. The airport is closed down and so that that is not going to resolve itself really fast. Wow. Sorry about that. Yeah, it's a mess. It's a really big mess. And every time I read an interesting article about it, the mess expands. Yeah, because these guys are being used, I mean, the Palestinians are being used by Iran and Russia. Because the timing is just perfect, right? But you have this insane election in Congress, trying to vote for somebody who wants to instantly cut off their assistance to the Ukraine. And you have the Saudi-Israeli peace treaty that the Iranians don't like. So the timing is sort of directed apparently. I don't know how they would escalate this thing, but it seems they would. I mean, they have been coming up with some pretty impressive surprises so far. So there could be more in store. Yeah, I think one of the first things the US did diplomatically is go tell everybody in the area, hey, do not use this moment to attack Iran. I mean, to attack Israel. But this could easily spin into a whole lot of other things. I don't know. Otherwise it's a desperate and sort of suicidal attempt by Hamas to get revenge, draw attention. If you compare this to a guy who feels like he needs to fight this 250-pound champion boxer and gets knocked to the ground and goes back up and gets knocked down, goes back up and just refuses to give up. And I mean, there comes a point where it's so senseless and it's just such a radically unsolvable issue. I mean, there's just no solution because the Israelis are not really very nice people either when you see what they're doing. Living in Gaza has been pretty awful for a pretty long time. Yeah, well, let's go to our book. All right. Pete, do you want to check in a bit about the pros calls? Sure. Chris Fusion is kind of on a request from Ray Schmitz was the idea that we could get started with collaborative writing using Markdown and Git. So it's a sibling of Neo Books kind of also a close sibling of Massa Wickey. It's still getting off the ground. It's been a little bit tricky trying to be, we have people who aren't really OGM people. And it was a little hard to find a common, common chat place, common chat notifications is still a little bit challenging. But I've got a Manimost channel. I'm probably going to set up an announce only email list. But anyway, once you get away from people who are in OGM, it's, you know, you get used to in OGM there, you can at least say, you know, there's a Manimost server and some people go, Well, whatever. Oh, okay, I got it. But, you know, anywhere else, you know, it's like there's not an email list that they're part of there's not a chat server that they're part of there, you know, disconnected and it's weird getting, especially a team of people connected. You know, that's been a bit of a challenge. I started doing Monday meetings at 7am and noon Pacific. I don't know how long we'll keep them we'll see. You want to describe the goals, just so classes up to speed. I don't have a class I don't know if he's been sending the the goal of goal of prostitution is to train up folks to do collaborative writing, not using Google Docs but using Markdown and and get. So the, and what did and get and get hub I guess, I actually posted a really cool kind of a scenario in in the channel about an experience I had during programming. It was the perfect kind of programming thing where I started working with somebody I don't even know on a project that, you know, we both have interest in his project I think actually this one was mine. So it's really common on GitHub to I did this another one over the weekend. You know, some project that you found interesting, you've contributed a patch to you've made a comment. And then, you know, somebody improves the thing on you and you get some notifications and you go in and you can find in a fine grained way, you know, comment or approve changes make suggestions of other changes. It's a little bit like working on a Google Doc, except the whole thing is super decentralized and super asynchronous and can tolerate a ton of people and very, very, very fine grained changes and multiple overlapping sets of fine grained changes. And all of that is easy in a way that you can't even really imagine from Google Docs or word. You see, once somebody has absorbed how GitHub basically does it stands. Well, that's very funny. It's just very funny. It's choosing to interpret this as a thumbs up gesture. It's a thumbs up. It's right. That's very funny. Very right. The flip side are the, you know, the, so that's the pro the con is that get has always been the bailiwick of programmers and nobody's really made much effort in making it usable for civvies. So that's the challenge for muggles. And has anybody done. I don't know if it could be squeezed down into two minutes but assume that somebody could be pre configured, meaning they wouldn't have to mess with plugging in installing or doing anything with an editor and like GitHub and a plug in and whatever else I assume it was all pre configured. Is there a really short video for muggles only that says just do these couple things, because that could be super duper useful. I think it could be. The answer is no. Okay. The slightly longer answer is partly because the world changed a little bit and partly, you know, there's there's new new tech, better tech, probably because there's better tech than when bill Anderson and I started trying to teach people get and mark down. The situation is a little bit improved. So it's a short script to go through and not much variation and not much places where you can fall down. If you just mean to do the install or just to be a participant to do the install. Okay. But I'm trying to separate the two issues entirely I'm trying to say, hey, you thought it was a one time event. And if we can take the pain out of that or the bite out of that great fine, but getting into the practice of it is I think that the daily thing that would matter to bring more muggles in know. Yeah. The daily practice is harder than the install. Yeah. It's not the weird thing is it's not particularly hard. But you have to you have to have some dedication to the idea that you want to do this. And then it unlocks, you know, an amazing, wonderful environment. So I'm enthusiastic about the potential I'm trying to figure out how to like paint the on round. The weird thing is, I think, Bill and I still discover places where we knew something or guests something that you'd have to explain it to a newbie, not necessarily a muggle just even a newbie. So today, for instance, in the preservation channel, we had a newbie. He doesn't didn't didn't know anything about get didn't know anything about hack indeed didn't know anything about markdown doesn't know a lot of stuff. So I was showing him hack and D and we didn't really teach him mark down but I told him, you know why there's two different pains. And then the thing that I thought was really interesting was, I was telling him that it was okay if he typed on this thing, right. You know, and, and just there's a there's like one of one of the things that compared to his kids learning soccer. So there's just some body language and ball handling and stuff like that that you don't know until you're kicking a ball around right. And the coach says no, don't do that or more likely more hopefully a player goes, you know, I don't know, you know, you didn't, you didn't get the ball because you weren't watching me when I kicked it, you should watch me right. Just little things like that. You know, so we were in a hack and D. And I was playing around a little bit with mark down not really teaching it. And I said, hey, I'm going to make a place down at the bottom. Well, I'll call it a section and I'll put a section header. And you notice that, you know, I, he said something a great, a great question I guess the great question led into me, like, showing them some of the body language. And I was, oh, cool. Are there way to do comments. And the answer mark down is, no, not really. But here's the body language that we use for it, you know, so here's, you know, here's a bullet. Here's just a parenthetical comment. And it turns out a markdown we don't really use comments anyway you just type over somebody else's code. So then to do that, you make a copy of a thing that you want to change paste someplace else and edit it live. You don't, you know, you don't make a comment you just make the change. But to do that, then you have to have sections and stuff like that. So all of that. It's not hard to explain. I think he got it quickly. You know, you can explain it once, you know, here's kind of the convention for this. You go, okay. You know, it's, it's a lot like, so it's, it's more human than technical. And obviously humans learn human stuff. Well, it and body language things like body language and conventions. You know, you only need to get told once, you know, to do it a certain way or to especially not do it a certain way because it makes everybody go, huh. And, you know, so, so I feel like all that stuff is easy to learn easy to teach hard to even know that it exists. So that's where we're at right now. There's a bunch of human practice stuff that's just not you, you learn it by being part of a software development team. And right now there's no other way to learn it. Except for the fusion. Thank you. class you had just sent the link to the what was the current draft before. Sure. Thanks class. And oh, do you have the link already Pete. It was in already here. Oh, good. Okay. Perfect. Good. And I wanted to see if you wanted to update and also last time you had sent a link to a different document. Which was Which is kind of related is that folded in here or is that a separate thing. Yeah, let me. Okay, screen for a moment here. What happened to my menu here. I don't know. Here we go. Good. So the. Yeah, so I you I have been using pages of the book for to to for different reasons. So there is one here is the hydrologic and which are then which are folded into the book but the book is too much to send to anybody right it's just too much information. So, I picked up the hydrologic cycle here. And this has really made quite a circle. I forwarded to send it a Merckley's office. And to to several other mosc's and to Sarah come up and to to a bite network and it's, it's not that any company of this is unique and new. No, but what is different is that we haven't really made the connection that having millions of square miles of farmland tried out has serious consequences on the hydrologic cycles. Which is now when you look at the conversations on LinkedIn and other networks is now taking center place instead of focusing on carbon, we should be focusing on this. Because you can focus on carbon as much as you want it doesn't restore the water cycle and the water cycle turns out to be a far more important short term impact. So that's one of these papers. And then here's another one that I that I send around is the big story of the small water cycle. That actually was sort of a precursor for this and I also got this published in our local paper. And then there was here talking in colors and I sent this to Senator Merckley as well. And to send that around to to sort of a really selected group of people who would get this, not take offense and and understand what what this really is. I'm not all embedded in the book, but I find that it's, it's better to take pieces of the book and use those two for for specific communication exercises. So, so there is that. Then, you know, I'm thinking at this point that we sort of have completed phase one of this. We got sort of the evolutionary pathway of agriculture and its impact on on humanity and, and then why we need to revolt and change this thing and then, you know, why we here's the spiral wizard now why we need to change our communications approach to unite around a different story that is digestible for everyone within within the society so for example this paper on hydrological cycle. It was deeply offensive to the green spectrum in the Sarah Club they thought it was a horrible way to talk about nature and life in the soil. But it doesn't it didn't even resonate in any form or shape in red and blue, because it was just like no way to complex. So it was really written for the orange spectrum, which now is important but it's also important to understand that the story has to be like radically shifted and changed to to fit into into different different different spectrums of consciousness. And then they're talking a little bit about food as a cultural element, you know you can't just think of food as something you eat it's, it has tradition and culture and social relevancy that that needs to be considered as well. And by the way, one important part of food revolt is the introduction of bio regions and the way to thinking of thinking in terms of bio region. When we restore the food system to that food has to be aligned with the capacity of the bio region to produce regeneratively. And then not talking in colors to to put into perspective how different groups think about climate change. So, you know, for for in the beige man, the world is simple, immediate is a simple immediate place, you know, food, water, shelter safety. In purple, it still doesn't mean anything, you know, climate change and so on. And it doesn't really even in red, it doesn't really do anything. So, so it's important to to recognize that particularly when you consider that the entire marker movement is composite is conversations in red. So then you come in this climate change and it just completely bounces off into the wrong direction. So anyway, so then then comes here I put in visions of the future. And then leading from the emerging future and an introduction into theory you thinking. And so that's where where I stopped. Basically, basically saying here in today's complex and interconnected world, our traditional way of communicating for social change often fall short. They're either over simplify issues or create polarized groups, making collect collective action difficult and involved understanding of human values, inspired by developmental psychology and systems theory can significantly enhance the efficacy of our messages and strategies. And in conclusion, you know, traditional methods of communicating for social change are often not sufficient for the complex polarized and ever changing world we live in. What's needed is a more evolved understanding of human values that takes into account the complexity and diversity of our society. Such an approach and only allows us to create messages that resonate with a broader range of people, but also encourages the adaptability and integration that are crucial for tackling the multifaceted challenges we face. This is not merely a theoretical concept. It's practical results oriented strategy that has far reaching implications for how we go about enacting meaningful social change. So that's where where I stop and I will consider this part one, you know, a book one. And then transition from here into, I don't know yet. Basically, you know, what how does that translate into into actionable ideas and steps. I think thinking about it as book one is good for us here because that gives us a unit of work that we can turn out as a book and then then other ideas will show up for you and that can be volume two or, you know, I think I think over the long run it will conceptualize this as a multi volume set which is terrific. I want to separate. I want to separate the conversation about the content and the flow of content which is super important from what you said earlier about process, because it seemed and I think I think I saw Pete nod briefly. It seems like you were finding your way toward what we're sort of arguing is a good way to do the writing which is to disaggregate the ideas into different nuggets that live in different documents. And so you were like, yeah, the book got too big and so I have this over here, but then there's a section here in the index on the left called talking and colors which I thought was a different document. So my question to you is, is this version the most up to date version or is the one outboard and the other document the most up to date version. And so how do you reconcile or how do you want to manage the two because I was assuming from what you said that talking colors would be a link from here to an external document that contained the most recent version of your text. But here you're you've got an inline. So is it because you're still liking to work with this as a one manuscript or is it for some other reason that you're not yet quite modularizing and extracting the chunks that might live together in a roll up. So the day is anonymous. It's an extract. I'm simply taking a piece of the book out. And in fact, when I write chapter chapters, I'm putting them first into this into this format. So you're basically copy pasting a chapter out so that you can share it with Congress critters or other people that matter to you. Okay. Okay. So so it's so you're doing that not to write it differently but because it's a convenience for posting it or sharing it in other ways. Yeah, it's just it's just too much to handsome on this whole book. Okay. But there are pieces of the book that are really that are really deep in in. I mean, this, this thing communicates at an IQ of 155. You know, and you read this. I mean, I obviously didn't write a whole lot of it. You know, I mean, this is amazing stuff. And so it's it's overwhelming to someone who hasn't dealt with it. It's just it's just way too much information. So, but there are pieces that fit into a given conversation. And so that and so this kind of modular use of the book could be very useful could be practical. Cool. And to play out a bit of what Pete was saying about those fusion. And what I'm saying about new books, like if the nuggets exist as web pages that are editable in a wiki format but they exist as web pages then all you need to do instead of copy pasting and sending somebody a Google Doc is you can send somebody a link to a web page. Yeah, which which could exist as an essay, but that essay gets rolled up into a book. Pete, do you want to add anything to what I'm, what I'm saying. Yeah, please. It looks, it looks really good costs. And Joe, you're totally right that if you make each chunk into a web page, then it's easy to move around. And then I have to kind of also observe that we've, we've trained people that a web page. The web page might be super fascinating, but probably most of the thousands of wood pages you've, you've seen in your life are pretty dull and born. So, as, as soon as becomes a web page, I think it's harder to pay attention to, or take seriously it's hard to say. So, you show somebody a web page, it's one of probably a trillion web pages, right. It's like, okay, I get the value of this. This is somewhere between, you know, spam and important. And there's a other trillion web pages I look, I can look at, and it's like, I don't know if it's important or not. Are you arguing for presentation in Google Docs. Nope, I'm arguing for presentation PDF actually. Ah, sorry, that just hurt. Really? I mean, I can see that. A personalized email. Yeah. So, you know, a personalized email with the same content is a step up. And counterintuitively, somebody that's gone to the, will come back maybe to why that's counterintuitive, but somebody that's gone through the process of making this into a little public. PDF, they've curated something for you to look at, rather than look I made this PDF for you. I just copied and pasted the Senate spam from the web and you should read it because it's super important and I really loved it. You know, we all get much more of that than we need already. So you're busy hacking the open rate or interest rate of the reader of a particular kind of reader in your what you're saying right now. Indeed. Okay. But, but I think it's a general class reader and I think it's, you know, 60% of people or something. Oh, I get PDFs I hate them, like just hate them. I think you're one of the, you know, outliers percent. Yeah. And there's another, you know, there's another question, like 10 years ago, if you send somebody a PDF, it was hit or miss whether or not they could even be able to see it. Right. But nowadays with modern email systems, it's pretty, you know, you click on it and you see it, you may not be able to do anything with it. You may not know how you saw it. You might have trouble getting back to your email client. Right. But you'll see the PDF. Fascinating class. Any thoughts. Yeah, I like that idea. I think it's think of the audience we're dealing with. Right. I mean, you really want to approach people who are not necessarily a super technical inclined. A lot of the like in our generation, a lot of people are sort of very marginal in the way that they interact with technology. So a PDF is pretty easy to get around with. And this is what it says it's about effectiveness now. He metrics engagement, behavioral change, policy impact, adaptability. I can say something about document management to and class, I don't mean I'm going to say something and I don't mean to say that you should do anything differently. You're doing a great job and more power to you. And then I can also kind of say this would be a lot easier in massive wiki or, you know, prosfusion than in Google Docs. Modulo that that, you know, the speed bump at the beginning, but once you've got over that speed bump, managing, managing chunks and, you know, different versions of chunks, assembling chunks, all of that becomes a lot easier. Now, at this point, class is showing it to us but I'm not doing a lot of activating any active editing of the document nor are you, I think. So this is not a collaborative writing project yet, except for classes collaborations with chat GTT. I don't know how or why this would be easier in massive wiki. Yeah, maybe maybe that's fair. I can, I can project a little bit. Keeping each of these things as a separate file on your computer, I think is easier than Google Docs. And that's, that's maybe a pretty bold statement. If you're good at Google Docs, then it's just going to work but I guess even then. So Google Docs is going to limit the, the working with files on your computer I think is is easier than working in Google Docs. What if I want to have two or three or 10 of these files together. What if I want to have a computer if I had each of these is a separate file, and I wanted to send this one this one and this one to somebody I'd go click click click and drag it over to my email thing right instead of trying to find the link or exporting or anything like that. I don't know it's just file management is is easier on a computer. So if we say okay here we got volume one. Let's lock it down. Then that seems to be, and let's do this on PDF. Alright, so you put this aside so you don't, you don't edit any further. I mean this is sort of closed down and then you trace it out. So I think it's kind of identifiable as a as a Neo book. Hopefully put a disclaimer on it or copyright statement and all of those things on there. So it's has some official context with that makes sense now. I think so. I would. A couple observations. One thing is I think. It's useful organizing something or new book is a new book is maybe even more useful. It looks to me like you don't have a book it looks like you have a set of, you know, a set of mini essays. So you have something that we don't have a word for, I think, new book. And yeah, new book is a good way to call it. So, so then in a new book, you'd have a, actually, you know, kind of back where we started with chapbooks or something like that, or they call them edited volumes or whatever they call you. It's more like you've got a set of monographs right. And you want to be able to deploy different ones to different places and, you know, you could call the whole thing a volume. But that it kind of when you call it a bucket kind of like reduces the utility of it in a way. I don't know. So, so then to your, your point in the pros fusion world, you wouldn't exactly lock it down what you would do is you would say, all of these things together I'm going to, I'm going to give it a version number. So this is version 1.0.0. And then you could publish, you know, small changes as version 1.0.1 or, you know, even the numbers, the three numbers have different meanings for what the digits are. So, so then somebody could say, you know, oh, I read your book I love it, and you'd say what version do you have it sounds like you're, you're parroting back something that I wanted to take it take out. And they would say, well I've got 1.3.5. It's like, oh, you need 1.5.0. And that, you know, clears up that confusion entirely. So, I think, I think that's what I would do is is make it a version. And we can talk about whether or not those three digits make make sense as versions, it could be version one version two version three or, you know, and publishing terms that's you know published 1995 published 1997 published 2001. I probably want a day or a month instead of a year but but yes, just saying, you know, saying this is a version and then putting the standard publication, you know, copyright and stuff. You're there pretty much. And also, I mean, I do consider this collaborative, Jerry, I mean, I know you didn't write directly, but we had multiple meetings where I reassembled content I added content because what we did in the conversations is basically you're in Stuart highlighting Yeah, I don't get what you're talking about. What this doesn't seem to make sense or you're missing something here, right. And so it was collaborative. So, so I totally agree with that it was collaborative at the conversational level, but not at the document management and editing level. So you have done all the changes to document. We have talked a lot about the content of the document and made suggestions and you've done a tremendous amount of work on it. So all I was saying was that the collaborative document part of it not so much it's just, you know, it's might as well be you working in whatever your favorite tool is and then spitting it out. And a couple things. And I'm really wrestling with my reactions here. As Pete is intuiting, except for the last thing Pete said about versioning, everything else that just came out feels like two giant steps backward and if we were to just squeeze this out as a PDF and publish that out in the world, it would not be a new book in any way that I'm conceiving of a new book at all. I want to not have it be a new book. So, so that's what I'm wrestling with is that the new book is actually connected nuggets that are alive and contextual that happened to roll up into a book. And if it's a book or a pamphlet or whatever. And if it goes out as PDF or E pub is not a big deal. But I thought it would be elegant to play this through as an E pub or Kindle direct book, so that we could say hey this is a neo book and it is book like and some books are relatively short. Like there's some very good books that are not very long. And that's kind of what I was what I was hoping and aiming for. But the nugget is Asian of it is essential to the new book and the existence of the nuggets in some lively fashion, where the nuggets are more interesting than the dry snapshot of the PDF or the ebook is essential, and not having any of those things it would not be a new book. Does that make sense makes makes a ton of sense. And we got into a particular point about PDFs. Which I did not mean to overstate. So you and I don't disagree. I believe if I want to send somebody a nugget. If I want to send a Congress person a nugget from a new book. I'm going to send it by email as a PDF, which I would agree with at some point eventually. And that's why I asked you this specific question. Hey, it sounds like you're hacking the audience here for how to deliver content. That's why I asked that question. Yes. So, we don't disagree. But that's a very narrow aspect of what this project I would hope is. It's an important it's an important item for class right now because that's how he's using the content. I think it's not as narrow maybe as you think. If I want to send it to not somebody in Congress, but if I want to send somebody in Greenpeace or if I want to send it to a farmer or if I want to send it to my city council or if I want to send it to my mom. So I'm still emailing a PDF and I'm picking a nugget I'm not sending her the whole thing. So my way of doing that would be every nugget would have a little widget that we could create that would say, Hey, I need to send this to a muggle that's not going to understand what to do. Turn this turn this nugget into a PDF. And by the way, at the bottom of the PDF, put a little live link that says, Hey, you can go visit this thing online if you want to be brave and go try the wild and woolly internet. And there's more information and resources and conversations are around this nugget online. So, and then, and then the PDF would be the transmission method for the people that you're assuming would prefer to see a PDF and the little widget could say now here's a place to customize it so that this person feels like it. It has their name printed in the PDF this this is this nugget for so and so destination Congress critter etc you could you could really dress this up to feel more special etc and that would just be a matter of code. And I, and I would find that completely like in line with with what a neobook with how a neobook could be used in particular because we would then be we the writer trying to communicate with other people would be working with the nuggets and then sending them out to make them visible. I totally agree with one small comment, which is the part where it says down at the bottom, here's a live link in case you're, you know, really, really crazy, you could use this thing called the web and go to this thing, and you'll find. I would say very little beyond that, the whole, you know, more information, blah, blah, you know, chat, blah, blah, because just even that, you know, that that could lead to overwhelm really could just say hey here's this document on the web. That's it. Yeah. And I'd be fine with that. I lose what you're trying to say. So for example, when I sent to the Sierra Club, this thing about the ice for logic cycle. That's all I wanted to talk about, you know, and if I had introduced any other topic and it would have gone poof, but this way you keep them focused now on this is this is what we're talking about here. There'll be a little checkbox on Jerry's widget thing that says these people can tolerate a web link. These people don't want a web link. Yeah. Yeah. To rewind, Jerry, I don't disagree with anything you've said, I think. Close to rewind a little bit to where we are in the publication process. I skipped over a thing that I think is really important. And I don't, we just didn't talk about it. The three of us just didn't talk about it, but it's an obvious elephant in the room. I would convert this to a different format to a publication format. And the publication format should not be PDF. And, you know, it shouldn't be Doc X or Google Docs or whatever. So, I hope that makes that's not controversial. So then the document, the format choices are Doc X is almost a format choice, but it's a really, really bad one, really brittle. So kind of your choices are HTML and markdown, I think there's other ones you could use like latex or restructure tax or things like that, but they get even more specialist than markdown or HTML. So I think that's a next pass is to get it either into markdown or HTML. Before, you know, so that's, that's where you say I'm done drafting. I want to start moving towards PDFs and EPUBs and web pages and all that between drafting and publishing the final formats is a archival format markdown or HTML, I think. So, obviously, you know, you're leaving me in the dust with the technology. I mean, I had to wrestle myself into chat GPT 4.0, which you've done beautifully by the way. And, but these are all push ups, you know, and reminds me that I'm 73 years old here guys. It's, it's not your job. This part is not your job. I'm glad you said this. Okay. I, you know, you're the author, right. And maybe the publisher or something like that. You, you know, you don't have to do. I, you're not the, you're not the printer, you're not, you know, this is I'm talking printing press stuff. I'm not talking. And it's really interesting. So kind of what's happening here because class, I think, I think that the moment Pete or I say, Hey, roll this out as markdown files in a GitHub repo for us. That does not mean the end of touching and editing the document. That means the beginning of collaborating with other people in this marvelous way that Pete is trying to do with pros fusion, etc, etc, etc. For you, it very likely means well, I'm going to kiss that document goodbye and I'll go back and work on a, you know, book two in Google Docs. And so there's this really interesting kind of parting of the ways that might happen. And it would be pretty easy, I think, for Pete or I manually or programmatically to take your major headings in the index of this Google Doc, and spit out each of the major headings as a nugget that's a markdown file like that, you know, we would you would probably lose some formatting but that the conversion is not that hard these things would live happily as you know separate markdown units, and then there would be one. There would be one markdown file which would act as the table of contents that would roll all those up, you know, with links, and that that was that's not, that's not, you know, difficult to do, but but it causes it throws this wrench in the works because I think for you it freezes the document. And that's not our intention. Our intention is that the documents once modularized are richer more interesting more lively more whatever. And I'm sorry that that's happening and I don't know how to resolve it. You know, I mean this is, I mean, my, my, my, my point here would be this talking in colors right because we need to be conscious of what audience were reaching. Yeah, we sort of have a tendency or Jamie speaking to, to talk to, you know, folks who are in the orange green range, you know, but have a complex understanding of yellow. And so, you know, they get this, but the challenge is to talk with people who are not on board and who, who need to be addressed with a language that is, that is speaking to their invite to their consciousness not to their environment to their vocabulary. So I think, correct me if I'm wrong. I think this book is not something that somebody in red is going to pick up read and enjoy. I think this book talks about at a metal level. How do we communicate with a bunch of different people at different levels and in the spiral dynamics model. I can see that if chat GPG could ingest the size of a book that it is, there could be a query to chat GPG hey, express this book in a way that that somebody in red would would love. And that would absolutely you could that would be a book with a different title. You have to, you have to train chat for that. So I did a few experiments and came out garbage. You really need, you really need to spend time with with with the AI to to trim this into something that comes out right that makes sense, because it just goes weird on you, you know, but so I'm not quite there yet to, I mean that that's just like a whole different work effort. I'm really wanting to to move into where do we what do we do what are the what are the levers right what are the two or three things that we can really focus on and and bring home right and Manchester not the back you was too much technical detail but they're who levels right. One is meat markets. So the the they are basically for international companies that dominate 90% of the US meat market, and they have systematically taken out all the upper to us no slaughterhouse capacities. So small farmers can't get into a USDA approved facility to process the animals which is a major impediment, you know, because meat is the most profitable part of a multi multi crop farm is integrated livestock. And it's also from an environmental perspective the best way to raise animals because first of all, it's humane, you know, and then you feed them this local business products that you have on your own farm already anyways right. So that's one thing and then the other thing is poke rich, you know, to connect to read to read to restore the cooperative movement that was dominating the agricultural business until they killed it. And so a cooperative cooperatives combine 50 100 200 farmers under an umbrella, they negotiate the high volume contracts with wholesale accounts, and then distribute them amongst their farmers they're participating farmers. So if they need 1000 acres of carrots, you get 50 you get 80 you get 100 acres right until and then they consolidate this and ship it out. And so that has gotten lost if you do these two things you can revolutionize the American food business. And so that's where I want to focus on next. And are the things you just said in the text of this manuscript so far. No, I think, I think you're describing book to yeah exactly. Yes, which which is terrific because book one like sets the groundwork and what's the appetite and says here's some strategies and book to says okay here's some things you could do, and you're often running. If I may, please. Two things come to mind. And class I love the idea that book to. I wonder if talking in colors is already a second book. Well, talking about the way we've been so far in a, in a spiral dynamics. So the way the way is it all of these. Sorry, I'm the way I've been thinking about it so far is that Klaus is applying spiral dynamics to the framework of the book and the goals to the book. And that is this particular this particular book is applied applying spiral dynamics to the problem of regenerative agriculture and how to communicate that. Okay, there could be there could be a parallel book, which is applying theory you to the same exact problem and that would be a different book. We don't really starts here, Pete. Yeah, we actually had a lot of discussion around it with Stuart and Jerry to make this sensible it really starts here to say, because you know what what now this does. It hasn't been used this way spiral dynamics. People are sort of aware of it but it hasn't been used in this in the way we're doing it here. And so we go through. How does it work what is what is it supposed to achieve and so on. So engaging the process of reforming our minds and you go through that part. And then I asked. So then you go now how do we, how do how have we historically dealt with communicating insights in the course of action then I wanted to, to say okay so how do you know what does this now look like in some more specificity. How do you frame these individual colors. When you're asking your right and on essay. What does the world look like to an event to an individual living in their respective be made so, considering the information this group has access to a nose to process, what are they thinking, who are their thought leaders operating at a higher level of consciousness. What are the motivations of these thought leaders for engaging with a specific be ma'am, right, thinking about how red is being manipulated by orange. The most recent state of cognitive dissonance caused by the divergence of talking about climate change versus observing it in real life. And that just came out super interesting because you realize that beige and purple and red and even blue they don't have cognitive dissonance, you know, because they have no clue what's going on, they can't even process it. So blue has some for has some cognitive resonance that dissonance I mean, but then orange is really stressed out. So that's where you start and orange is really stressed out because they know they're scoring this thing up, they understand the science, and they're determined to do it anyway and it's getting more and more difficult to deal with it. But that's what I mean, it's really interesting stuff that I mean, I could have never thought of right I mean but here you have an intelligence that you're interacting with. You know, that's just like wow. Incredible. If you want to go or I'll remember what I have to say go ahead. I may. Part of my concern is looking at the, the old title the story of soil. I think Jerry captured it well he said, this book is kind of explaining how you how to communicate. It's a story of soil or water to different audiences through a lens of spiral dynamics. So if that's what the book is about. It's awesome. And I, I appreciate that it hasn't been done before, and I'm glad somebody's doing it. That's, that's different though, then the story of soil, right. The story of soil is a small kind of like seed around which you can talk about the communication strategy of, you know, social change. I, I wouldn't want to, I wouldn't want much of a book that's at one at a subject level and that a meta subject level I wouldn't want them to be this. I would want those to be two separate books. Let me add a thing quickly here because I love what you just said and I want to combine what both of you said a moment ago, which is there, I can easily envision a spin out book called something like applied spiral dynamics, which and cause you're saying nobody's done this before we could certainly do more research and figure out if anybody's sort of been doing this but the idea that you're picking up spiral dynamics and turning it into a way to communicate and a PR strategy and a communication strategy is cool. And if it's unique and new that's a that's a book on its own, and that book could even contain as a case study, the talking and colors section here which is very specifically how do we talk about regenerative agriculture and water and soil to these different audiences in the colors that could just be that could just be a random case study in a book about spiral dynamics and that could be a separate Neo book that you wouldn't actually have to do that much to fix. But it had a completely different audience and it would, it would only be about spiral dynamics it wouldn't have the front matter about the story of soil and water and all that kind of stuff. So that that's kind of cool and exciting. And then, I think that we haven't, we haven't had the conversation about what should the actual title of the book be once once you're done. And I think it's clear that that spiral dynamics or something like that because of the approach and because of how much of the content is needs to be reflected in the title as Pete was just saying. And so I'm seeing the story of soil as a placeholder title. It could be a subtitle a subhead or piece of it it could be the major chapter heading for the first half of the book I don't know. But I think it fits slightly differently than we've got it right now. But spiral dynamics has been used by Cambridge Analytica, for example, right. And it's being used by Heritage Foundation and by Russia. You know, because that's how they communicate and that's how they have such an iron Crip now on the. You are, you are writing the introduction to that book right now as you speak. Because because each of those is sort of sort of covert. And what you're going to do is say hey, this needs to be made more explicit and here's how I love it. And then the other thing is Pete I mean to to your point, they are audiences where you couldn't send this book with the inclusion of spiral dynamics because they would consider it offensive. You know, I mean, they would because they would automatically feel ranked here and people hate being put into this ranking box. Which which mostly I wonder if you have how many books you have. So each of the nuggets is not really what I'm talking about maybe maybe those are chapters or something like that but. If you've got so you've definitely got meta content you've got content about how to present the base level content to different, you know, successfully different social audience, different in different social ways right. So that meta content. It's, it's kind of like in high school or university that meta strategy book would be the teacher's workbook right here's how you teach the course using the textbook. So, I'm just, I'm just trying to make sure that you don't have the textbook and the advanced teachers workbook in the same book. I think they should be separate. So, so, I mean, these are all create discussions, which, which really shows there's a whole, a whole next level work effort that needs to happen right. For me, I mean, I think it's pants on fire kind of time right and I have a meeting on Friday with a with a PhD form Seattle who has doctoral studies on their way. And he's interested in maybe funding something I'm I like to work on in the community. I just got connected with the case to crowd guys, you know, John O'Lough and Finnian. And they, they are in they, you know, looked at what I just did he and Ben's with this local event, which is like, it's a form of focus group research that hasn't been really recognized so much as qualitative research but the data that came out of this meeting we had here and Ben is so valuable. You know, it's absolutely fantastic. And I mean, and it's completely community based, you know, because each community has so set such different dynamics because of different actors involved and, you know, you have to really bring people that are that are engaged together and they may come from completely different backgrounds in one community versus another. I mean, for example, the Sarah Club in Bend, all they want to do is go on hikes nature walks right. And then you go to the next place and these guys are on fire, you know, engaging in agriculture and, you know, legislation and what have you so so you really need to go community specific so that's cool. So that's that's where I want to focus my attention. So this has been a phenomenal, phenomenally helpful exercise for me to focus my thoughts, and to get support really I mean, this this AI is kick ass amazing structuring your thoughts and adding to it in ways that you would have never thought of. And so I have no idea how to do it yet. But I like to carry this over now to this next implementation too. And this is a theory you approach I mean, you know, I've been following theory you for years. And so now, you know, this is a crystallizing understanding right here. So we have crystallized the issues. But now we go into into prototyping. So we don't we now need to. So what do you do prototype. What are the most important outcomes that you can imagine would be most helpful and achievable and all of that right so so that's where so that's where I want to go is guide prototyping thoughts and hope and maybe even engage personally in some of those experiments. Small side note, the theory you component of this book started to grow recently and I think it might grow enough to be part of this title subtitle complex meaning, you know, addressing addressing water and soil for regeneration via spiral dynamics and theory or something like that. Yeah, it's a way over here is like, yeah, I haven't fleshed that out yet. This actually deserves it or its own lead in page and graphic introduction. Yeah, leading from the emerging future, of course, is a is a key slogan that Otto Schaumer invented. And I love this year leadership essentially it's not what the person or an individual does. That's the biggest misunderstanding the essence of leadership is the capacity of the system in which everyone is participating to sense and shape the future and to be in touch with what is wanting to emerge and then stepping into that. I mean, I just that's just this whole theory you think it's just amazing. I'm class I hear you and I agree with you pants on fire. It's time to get this out. And I think so I think, you know, whatever you can do we can do to help get it out. ASAP is a right thing to do. Additionally, there's kind of a longer, longer timeline thing that could happen. One of those I so now now like the author is kind of done with the work. And at this point, I think in a regular book publishing scenario, it would be a good time to have production editorial look at the whole thing. And, you know, kind of change, change things to not change content but change some of the presentation. I think that stood out for me right away right was the chat to be the question the prompt that you've got to create the content. I love that you did that. And I think it's going to be a big distraction for most people. So as a production editorial staff member, what I would say is, hey, let's, that happens over and over in the book, it's great. I think it's important to keep that content. Let's hide it a little bit from regular readers will put a footnote here. You know, here's a footnote that goes to the appendix of all of the chat to the problems. That kind of stuff, you know, just let's, let's take the presentation and kick it up a notch and book book public production basically it's a production stuff. Also about at this time in a regular book, I think what they would do is I forget the name of it even, but they make a preview book out of this one of the big thick Xerox copies. The book galleys. So they send out galleys to, you know, 20 of your closest friends and a few editors right. So I personally and, you know, personally, I would take the book at this stage, and I would say, I'm done. I've done what I wanted to do it says what I want to do. I personally I wouldn't call this version one. Oh, I would call this version zero dot nine. I would send galleys out to, to people and say hey mark this up work with my editor. You know if you see something that that should be expressed differently if you didn't understand what the meme is and we need more footnotes about it if I need to write another section about you know v memes and spiral dynamics, you know, all that kind of stuff. And that process to bring it from the eyes of, you know, a few people to the eyes of another bigger circle 20 people or so through that process. I still thought I actually started getting sick. A couple of days ago, because I think I just totally overloaded myself. I was yesterday I slept the entire day I was just out. And so I have to be a little bit careful managing my own, my own energy. And then and then I'm going to be gone again for two weeks I'm going to Mexico so the next two weeks I'm gone. I mean, would it be, would it be okay, since this is meant to be a collaborative project to hand this over from here. And then I step back from it, you know, of course, if you want me to do anything update or change or whatever I'll do that, but step back from it and then and then you just form it in a way that matches the vision of a new book. That's exactly right. And yeah, this is, this is where you've sent off your final draft. And now I think it's the editorial and production team that takes over and project manages all of that stuff right. What format should it have to be, you know, how are we going to paginate it. What does, what did the overall book, you know, what size is it all that kind of technical stuff right that's not an author's job that's the production staff editorial stuff publishing stuff. What we don't have on the hand is in particular. So many things we don't have in hand because we're sort of DIYing this but we don't have the writing editor basically the day to day editor, who who you would send a manuscript to and who would then like read it front to back to make sure that there's continuity that the topics come up properly that that the whole like smells like a book and we don't we don't have one of those. So, so the galley phase that Pete was just describing would come mostly after that you and your editor would first go through a couple cycles where you're happy with the book, then it goes out for as not even galley's, it's basically a review copy. Galley's are like when you're just about ready to galley's I think, are when the finished book has been sent to the printer but it's not quite done yet. So you have a couple of nicely about of like temporarily bound books that you send the people and say hey read this and give me a review before it publishes on July 24th or whatever. So we don't have that person. We don't have somebody who's going to do, and it's a bunch of work, to do a critical read front to back of a book and offer useful suggestions to sort of turn it into a book or useful prompts back to you, Klaus, to say, hey, there's like a hole between this topic and this topic. Could you write a bridge? Or, and I think that's what's still needed. I don't know that we have a finished manuscript here, and I haven't had the time to read it front to back. So we need to either, Klaus, you could hire an editor temporarily for one project and say, hey, can you help us turn this into a book? I don't know what that would cost. I imagine it's a few thousand dollars, but that's possible. I think we're trying to MacGyver this and crowdsource this. So maybe skipping straight to the galley's phase will kick up a couple of people who do a careful read. And sometimes that happens. That it could be that you send 15 galleys out and one or two of the people you sent to were like, this was, I love this topic, but I found a bunch of stuff that needs, and that's the person you want, right? But in the book publishing business, there's actually a person who gets paid and whose role it is to sit down and slowly go through it and actually like do the crafting. We could also publish something that isn't that crafted and just see how the whole mechanism works and kind of skip the feedback if it doesn't show up in the galley sharing phase. Go ahead, Pete. I think that galley sharing phase is actually pretty important, which is not the case that I wouldn't just publish it. I think it's okay to publish it. I think maybe what I would do in the front matter, I'd have a kind of like one of those fun drive thermometers or something where it says, we think this book is at version 0.9, we're interested. It's not quite fully baked, but we want to rush print it basically. So take that in mind and we're looking for feedback. So please get in touch with us if you are interested in a little bit deeper. So I think, Jerry, my guess is partly for some of the reasons Klaus just said, he's got to manage his energy. And partly process-wise, this is where the Neo Books team has to figure out how to lift that project. At this point, it's actually project management, right? Of that editorial process and stuff like that. Who's seen it? Who wants to see it? Who's made what comments, where all that kind of stuff? That's not something that, not something authors would typically do, not something that authors have a lot of energy for. And Klaus, the author is gonna be way too close to the material anyway, right? Part of that editorial process is getting more eyes, varied eyes from different viewpoints and shaking it out before you release it to everybody. So for various reasons, I think maybe between you and me, Jerry, we need to emulate a project management function. And then that review process function. And I think crowdsourcing it rather than I, well, unless somebody has a couple of thousand dollars, $2,000 laying around, I think it's fine to try to crowdsource that. And ask people for favors probably, hey, this is an important thing. We need some feedback. Can you do that for us? I think that the three of us can share the lift in the sense that I think it's important for, I think if Klaus writes a brief intro that says some of the stuff that you just said, Pete, that's about the draft and what condition it's in and how feedback could be dealt with and all that, or we could draft something for that and Klaus can check off on it. And then we basically spit this out as a PDF and send it to people as an editable draft. Now, the problem with sending it to them as a PDF is that then all edits are manual. Who knows how the comments come back? That's its own little funny issue. But I think it's important to get the draft in front of people that Klaus knows who would be willing to give it a read. And then I think it's also important to get it in front of people that Klaus doesn't know that we could probably find in some way. So I think that those are complimentary groups of potential readers. And I don't think we're talking about more than 10 people total of whom maybe half might read the manuscript. You have to count on the fact that some people are gonna say sure, sure, and then never get to it. I would try to hit 15 people and expect two or three. That sounds good. And the thing about peer review with an official book is that those people are actually sort of contracted to do a peer review of a book and they do, they come back with their comments. So it's much more professional, reliable, et cetera. So we're, again, we're divering here. But I think that's doable. I like that. I think Jerry, you and I should do it and Klaus shouldn't. I mean, honestly, I mean, I'm so overcommitted. It's crazy, you know, right now, I mean, they want me to write something for the local Republican MOC and it's just, I just really have to condense my focus because I literally, I mean, I was just, when I came back after vacation, you know, I just jumped in it with two feet and then I crashed on Friday. You know, I was just completely out. Like my rationale for what it's worth, I make total sense, Klaus. Jerry, my rationale is that this is actually, you and I can do that work, not under the billing code of the story of Soil or whatever, but under the billing code of new book process. This is something that you and I kind of need to document as a process and Klaus probably has very little interest in documenting that process. Documenting as a process, it's part of the tiles of work that needs to be done. And then we can take that documented process and say, you know, we can hire for it, we can fundraise against it, all that kind of stuff. So I guess what I'm suggesting is not so much that we need to do a particular chunk of work, but we need to document how the work would be done while we're doing it so that we can sell it and fund it and stuff like that. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I agree. That sounds great. And I'm going to, I'm going to be in Mexico in Cabo for 10 days. So I'm going to start consolidating my thoughts on how to tackle this next line of thinking about where's the action, how do you frame it, how do you set it up so that people get what you're talking about, the historic perspective of how markets have evolved in the United States and where they are today and so on. And so I'm already starting to get it, but honestly, yesterday, even yesterday, I had like one big plank page to not even where to actually I go with this, but then things sort of, once you start focusing on something, things sort of start falling into place, simply by point putting your eyes in that direction. So that's sort of what's happening. Cool. That sounds like it'll work. Thank you so much, Peter, all of your input is just so timely. You're welcome. Yeah, thanks for showing up on this call. I showed up because Klaus said, hey, nice mid-journey images. They should be in a new book at some point. So maybe we can talk about that a little bit. Yeah. Wanna talk about that? Sure. What images might be useful and what style and stuff. I have to say that it's hard to get mid-journey to do the right thing. The way that I do mid-journey, I think there's two ways to do mid-journey. You generate hundreds of images and pick the few that are actually what you want. Kind of like an amateur photographer. You shoot thousands of frames and you get two or three good ones. The other way that you use it in a professional setting, a professional artist, I think what he or she's gonna be doing is using mid-journey a lot for brainstorming and mocks and stuff like that. And then for final images, they'd probably generate three, five, 10, 20 different images and literally copy and paste them all together and Photoshop them together, right? If you want a specific image, mid-journey doesn't give you a specific image. It gives you lots of creativity. Kind of like chat GPD, you know, I think about it. So having said that, during AI 101 this morning, another thing that I'm leading, we were doing mid-journey and it turned out, one of the participants had a great question. Pete, I'm trying to get essentially a stock photo of scientists, lab coats, beakers, blah, right? And for the life of me, I can't get test tubes and beakers and it's like, it skitters all over the place and I can't get what I want. How do you do that? And so I told the story, well, make 500 images and pick the two best ones for be a professional artist and know how to use Photoshop out of 20 images. There's another one which actually worked amazingly well. I've never done it before and I felt a little weird about it. So let me run this past you. It turns out- I also wanna look at the screen. What's that? Klaus, do you wanna stop screen sharing? Thanks. It turns out that you can do a search, however you wanna do a search. Stock photos, science lab, white coats, test tubes, blah. So then you get a bunch of stock photo things from the various stock places. They're all copyrighted. They're not for reuse, which is fine. That's wonderful. So I don't wanna use them and I've actually stopped myself. Personally, I don't even touch anything that's not mine. So any source material I'm feeding to mid-journey, it's photographs from me, not anything from the web. So this was the first time I realized, so there's a thing that you do in mid-journey. You say, hey mid-journey, here's an image. Tell me what prompt you would use to generate images like this. Works really well. I've been doing that with photos and it's super fun. Super creative, super interesting. Super interesting. Of course you can do the same thing with a stock photo. So during AI 101 is like, okay, this is kind of what we were looking for. Mid-journey described this to us. So that's the dirty feeling part of it. It's like, we're kind of looking at somebody else's work. But literally what the mid-journey says is maybe I'll share my screen and we can try to find it if that's okay. We were in, oops, I went too far. So this is a stock image that we picked, Hallamy. I appreciate that they own it, but I also have free use rights to look at it and maybe even describe it to somebody else. So mid-journey can do this thing where it says, here's the prompts I would use to make images that kind of look like that. And if you'll notice, it's not very descriptive. It uses a bunch of secret code words for its internal thought processes, which you would never have guessed, right? So with magnifying glasses, there aren't any magnifying glasses. In the style of Soviet, okay, I don't know where that comes from. Fluid and organic, nothing in here is fluid and organic. So transcendent stylish fluid gestures, it likes the fluid thing for some reason, eye-catching, repetitive. I would not have come up with a repetitive. So it's funny, the command that you use to do these things, it's literally called describe upload image. So to my human brain, it's always meant, oh, it's describing the image. And if I gave this to chatGPT, chatGPT will actually now describe an image and you can say, it looks like there's two people in lab suits and they're doing some scientific process. Oh, and I noticed the microscope. That's the kind of thing chatGPT will say. Mid-journey doesn't do that. It gives you a prompt that has some relationship to what a human would say about it, but mostly it's internal thought process about what it sees, right? So this is what it generates off the first prompt, the second prompt, the third prompt, the fourth prompt. So, so I learned today for the first time that taking a copyrighted image and asking Mid-journey to hallucinate about it gets you images that are different, but obviously inspired by that copyrighted image. So I don't know how to feel about this exactly. I feel like the amount of, it's really just an impression, get an impression of this image and then create completely new images. So it feels like that's fair use. Does that feel like fair use to you guys? I think so, inspired by without chewing it up. Yeah, I mean, that genie is out of the box, don't know. You know, now that just asking that question helped me think also you could take a number of images like this, create a bunch of them. And actually I do this all the time. I'll take these kinds of descriptions, give them to ChatGPT. So you could take four different source images, generate 16 different prompts that are in the right direction for Mid-journey and you can tell ChatGPT to mix them up. So at that point it's, there's nothing of the original left really. Interesting. Wow. So this is a way to get pretty much what you want without having to figure out the inscrutable. Or at least way closer. Yeah, way closer. Totally fair, you know, like we kind of thought this image here, this upper left one was fun, but it's also like it's got these physically kind of like ludicrous things about it. So there's some techniques that you can use to hear your variants of that. Oh, I want them to look surprised and I don't want their hands a certain way or something in one of these. Yeah. That's just really amazing. I was just reading a couple of weeks ago that a guy won a photo contest $25,000 prize with an AI generated image and then he fessed up and gave the money back but they were all mad at him. Yeah, it's going to happen. Like you said, the genie is out of the bottle. Yeah. Maybe live in interesting times. Seems all too true. It would be nice to slow it down a little bit but I think that's only going to go faster. Between the place we started this conversation today, just Hamas's thing in the Middle East and how that might bubble out. Climate change and this year being the hottest on record as opposed to last year being the hottest on record and the spike going upward quickly and all the permutations that that leads to and then the geopolitics of all the above mixed into the world. It's like crazy times. Very, we should right now be in a phase of mobilization. But what turns out now is and this is really what AI is helping us to understand. It's not carbon, you can fight carbon all day long and reduce it. No, it's biodiversity and it's having roots in the ground. The hydrological cycles have been so disrupted now that that is actually more of what we experience as climate change than carbon in the atmosphere. And the only way you can fix that when you think that 80% of water globally is used by agriculture, the only way you can fix this is by changing agriculture. And so how do you change agriculture? Well, it's a whole systems change. Now you can't change any component without changing everything. But you can't break through. So I come in with this super high charged, let's do stuff and even people who are basically aligned and basically wanting to do the right thing feel overwhelmed with the intensity of what I'm saying. So I have to always buffer myself down and, yeah, yeah. I'm reminded a good person to have kind of crosswise show and tell about public communication in climate science and publishing nuggets would be Mark Trucksler. He's been doing a lot of that. And just not necessarily within any, just some cross-fertilization of ideas about how people consume things, how to publish things, how to get them reviewed, all that kind of stuff. It'd be a good resource. Yeah. Are we gonna be asking you, you'll be in Kabul the next two weeks, right? Yeah. Okay. I leave on Sunday, yeah. I've forgotten when Stuart's back. So I'll figure that out. Pete, I'll communicate with you because maybe a thing to do is to meet here next week. And you and I start doing what you just talked about. I think that that's a good idea. And maybe you and I can check in on Friday and do a little bit of... Yeah. So I'm going to open up a new section. I'm gonna keep with Gmail, they're always with Google there, but Google Docs. But I'm going to open up a different section and start a new book basically, yeah. A new book, too, you mean? With the new idea? Yeah, what do you mean? Yes. That'd be a new Google Doc, right? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. That's great. Very good. Thank you so much. Love you, Pete, for coming. Likewise. We appreciate it. You're welcome. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right. Bye.