 And so whatever exit everybody was taking to get to their, to their buildings, that's the ads that they, that's what they saw. That's great. This is the Neo books call for Monday, March 25, 2024. I was hoping to reporting on progress on an intro to Neo books, but I'm not really done enough to do that yet. But I that's high on my priorities list as the explainer we've been talking about. Dave, I'm curious about the rainbow and the, the slightly garden of earthly delights characters that are populating your rainbow. And I wish I could tell you more, except I found it on the web somewhere. Oh, okay, okay. The web artifact steward. Yay. So we're still connecting to audio anytime now. Ready and, oh, that's taking its own sweet time. Can you hear us Stuart, and you hear us yet. No. There we go. Welcome Stuart. Good. You're muted. We're just starting out. Howdy. Hey, nice to see you. Welcome back. Welcome back. Thank you. Thank you. So I was just reporting in that I'm working on a Neo books explainer like what are these things and why do they matter and how does that work but I'm not done enough yet to show it here. And my goal is to get it good enough that I can take over an OGM call and make that the topic so that we can get the word out and recruit people back into here and do some more goodies along the way. So that's my way of just starting. And does anybody have a burning Neo book issue that you'd like to discuss. We, I mean, I can do a report out on the things on the GRC one. We had another Friday session that I thought went pretty interesting. I feel like there's a pattern around these kind of. You probably have as much better down. But anyway, a pattern around trying to get organized around stuff where the 1st session tends to be just like a muck. And then like slowly the 2nd and 3rd sessions start to get more coherence. You have to, you know, you have to get through at least 3 of these before you can decide whether you're making any progress or not. But this felt fairly productive. I was just trying to see if I can share the notes document. One of the, one of the things that I'm excited by and I don't know, I don't think we said this last week is that I've been, I took that when set up nuggets I'm trying to get us to talk about burning embers. The idea being that we were trying to spark ideas with the stuff that we're putting together. They're not passive. They're active. They're, you know, they're, they're on fire. So we're, we're, we're, we're trying to talk about burning. I'm trying to talk about burning embers set of nuggets, but the translation of the same concept. And let's see, I'll share the, I'll share our notes document. I don't know if it's straight or not, but. Yes, Dave, very much so initial conversations are always, you know, what I've called divergent. And in order to have some coherence and understand what you're doing, you need some convergence. You know, it just takes a little while I think of people talking and maybe some listening to the kind of start to get to get some of the convergence so it just the patient component. As a brief aside Jerry Jose and class thank you for completing the agreement document. This project. I didn't fully complete it but I started. And we didn't have that conversation last week because you weren't in the call so we were going to go back into that as well. Great. Thanks. Thanks for that update Dave. Yeah, just how are people responding to the notion of embers and is it catching. Haha, is it is it catching fire. Yeah, I don't know if anyone was more, you know, I was excited about it. You know, I don't know if anybody else adopted everybody you know that was part of the spinning around is like people I think everybody has their same, their own concepts that we're revolving around. So there were things like you know there's a lot of conversation around 12 step programs and kind of, you know trauma and interconnectedness and you know, so motivations and people's kind of vision for what's possible or complicated right. And I don't even think I mean I'm still excited about the notion that this would be something that you'd have multiple people, you know the core set of the fire and a whole bunch of people producing from it in various channels. I'm not positive that everybody else thought I did that idea so or you know or that it's even possible to orchestrate but. But to me that still feels like kind of an income at an integral part of being meaningful is kind of somehow harnessing that abundant effort in some kind of way that amplifies. Any thoughts or questions from anybody about what Dave was just talking about. If not, I will turn our attention to the neobooks agreement. Yeah just like to do respond to what you're talking about and what you picked up on Jerry. And we spoke about this before I think that you know people have different attachment to different metaphors and depends upon what they're drawn to. So within this group nuggets has a particular meaning which I feel like I'm still grasping. And I do like the idea of something that's more dynamic so embers. I raised the previous one of the notion of, you know, spores and mycelium networks something that's more dynamic and even for me I think whatever metaphor you choose they're going to be upsides and downsides. And it's just a question of what resonates with your audience and what what gets them going inspires them. And I think we should look at the output rather than the metaphor what works in one group may not work in another group. So whatever metaphor works and I think actually helps to have a variety of metaphors so we don't get too locked into a particular metaphorical framework. Which is sort of what I've ended up doing because I love mycelium and fungal metaphors I think they're fabulous. So I own the big fungus.org. And I've been I've got a bunch of pages about why mycelium metaphors are so cool etc etc, and I'm trying to do that at the same time as over here. I'm talking about nuggets and narratives and. I mean, I mean, yeah, even even my see I still find limitations with that because to me it doesn't create it doesn't involve high level creativity. So that one can go to tapestries is a metaphor where it's not just a simple it is, you know, I'm buying metaphor tapestry something that you know is last six centuries you know. And, you know, so they're upsides and downsides so I think it's a question of playing around with metaphors. I love that. Anyone else thoughts on this. If not, it might be useful for us to dive into the neobooks agreement spreadsheet again and just talk it through more. Get refamiliarized with it, and figure out what's where let me. Let me move Jose's column closer to the rest of the ones that are filled in. And then let's. Shall we just go. Stuart, do you want to walk us through this. Well, let me just say one thing, okay. It's not meant to be a word Smith document. Mm hmm. Okay, I just want to make that clear. Yeah, it's, it's meant to be kind of cumulative in some way. And to surface where there, there are really big disconnects that we need to be concerned about. Okay. So it's, it's kind of a working lattice work. All right. As a, as, as an as an outcome, and, and, and a container for our thoughts about what it is that we're doing. That's the intention one tools. I looked at it a couple of weeks ago and, and frankly, I'm a little still, still quite brain dead right now. I'm sort of traveling back from, from Bangkok yesterday. So I haven't had a chance to really drill down through it. I didn't realize you'd just gotten back that. Yeah. Yeah, I got back last night and the first night of sleep is. I guess for being on the call is different is difficult and I don't know. I've been, I've been read anybody read the book parable of the sewer. I've got it on Kindle, but I've not finished reading it. Um, you know, you have your Butler book. Yeah, pardon, the Octavia Butler book. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Um, I don't know who recommended a while ago, but it's an extraordinary literary explication and detail of what life could be like in a dystopian environment. I wish it on no one, but it's, it's pretty, it's pretty riveting and the interesting thing it was written about. It was written in. I'm looking for the date is 1993. Yeah, thank you. And the projected dates of when the dystopian landscape were right around where we are right now. So that's the good news, I think that that that that we're not there, but it's a it's really a quite a riveting, a riveting read anyway. That has got my brain, a little, a little crazed also I was reading it as I couldn't quite sleep last night. All of us are all of us are old enough to have lived through 1984 and 2001 and all these milestone years that we're going to change everything right. Yeah. Yeah. Well, she actually picks 2024 as the actual year of the instability. Yep. Yep. When thing that's when things totally fall apart. Oh, great. We're still early in the year here. Only month three. Thanks for that thought, Dave. And Stuart, one of the ways I pressed April when I first met her is that I had just the night before landed on my first trip to Seoul, South Korea, and I started telling stories about my trip to Seoul, you know, over coffee with her and Kevin, Kevin Jones. So yeah, she was like, Oh, I just have to say one thing about the trip and I spent two weeks in China weekend and a weekend. Guangzhou weekend Shanghai. And, and I'm going back in a month to spend some time in Taipei and Beijing. Wow. Yeah. I really didn't think deeply about expectations of what I would find there. But I was just walking around in some ways a gap and of course I was in mostly higher end parts of the city, which is pretty extensive. I mean, China. There's a little darkness in the felt sense of what the place is like. But it's also orderly and it works. And it's a huge consumerist society. Unbelievable the level of high end malls but also the quality of the roadways the cleanliness of the streets. It's just something to think about when we think about governance and I know you've been having these governance calls. And the same thing was true with, with, with Guangzhou. So, and then I, you know, drove home from the airport last night or was, was, was driving home last night. And the level of shakiness of the roads because there was such this repair was just unbelievable by contrast. Yeah, yeah. When all the autonomous vehicle stuff popped up a couple of years ago and got hot. I was like, China not going to have trouble with autonomous vehicles because the roads are clean and then whatever you go down a country to India. And you, you have shacks on the side of the freeway and like kids urinating on the sidewalk because that's what they do. And it's like so entirely different. You do not want to be in an autonomous vehicle in India kind of any place. I don't think for a long time. But, you know, also notice just noticing the, you know, the freeways, aside from the positive condition of them. They are filled with probably, I would say 7075% electric vehicles, and mostly all late models. And the idea of the US EV marketplace, you know, that China is going to eat their lunch is the common parlance. Yes. You know, driving in many of these cars and the equivalent of Uber called I can't remember where it was a grab the service in China. They have, you know, fine vehicles so interesting time ahead. Indeed. Can you take us through talking through the new book agreement. Do you want to lead that. Sure, in a way that works for you. Yeah. My brain's not really right. Okay. I don't have, I don't have the worst power to do it. Sounds great. Let me let me just give it a go and then we can, you can correct us as we as we come back and figure things out. Let me move Rick closer to the crowd. Whoops. There we go. Rick, I'm going to move you in closer so we see what you're writing as you're writing it as we go. Excellent and Dave. Oh, good, you're doing the same thing. Fabulous. I think we just had there's this broader topic of intent and vision and I tried to be really, really short in mind and mine's still the longest one but and then breaks down into roles promises and so forth and I like the categories I thought I found myself easily able to address them. And I was, I was sort of hoping to create like the baseline narrative that we would then go on together as we figure stuff out. Let's see, there we go. Yeah, and Jerry, what I what I can say is that I think that the intent and vision here is probably the most important piece for where we are right now just to get some, you know, clarity of just what it is that we're doing. And so in the middle of my paragraph is like nugget more our social interactions around nuggets might improve thinking in discourse affecting how we share and improve ideas is I think maybe the core of what I'm trying to, what I'm trying to communicate is that is that this is not about publishing books. This is really about liberating ideas and helping I helping us share ideas and the ideas don't have to be facts. And they can be crazy ass opinions that's fine. But when they start to get organized up into nuggets or embers, and we start to be able to compare and contrast them and tell stories around them I think that's where it gets really interesting. And then a lot of us in the description talked about the poly crisis or the different, you know, crises that are going on. Let's see who want who would like to jump in and just describe your own opinion on this or how would respond to other people's inputs on intent and vision. Let's just stick with that for a second. I had two reactions. And I think I just looked at it and I'm thinking at two levels one at metal level. What's the metal level across things versus the particular things are interested in. And I think that might be worthwhile separating out. I mean, looking at the metal level is much more in terms of what is the commonalities across what different people's domains of interest are. And what are the, what are the meta features and benefits of new books. And what are the outputs. And one idea that I've been I sort of had in the back of my brain I brought it forward and articulated it and that is, you know, I was thinking about new books but I was I was then thinking about co lab books, which means is a little different maybe different I don't know. But the idea is a new book is never done. And the reason why I say co lab is because in my in one of my blog posts, I said, I'm going to invite people now. It's very difficult to initiate change of behaviors on, you know, LinkedIn or any platform because people get stuck in a modus operandi. And it's a real transition to go from pushing content, say from a marketing and messaging perspective, which has its value, which is not what I'm interested in as much. It's important, but I'm actually more interested in how can you get people to think differently. Now you need both, but actually I'm more interested in the latter than the former. So I'd be interested in what people's ricochet reactions are to what I just said and if it made me sense to people. Yeah, I'll focus on on the last statement you made Rick about, you know, getting people to think differently. Though the marketing isn't is an important the articulation of ideas in a clear way as it as it as a template to generate different thinking. I think that's that's very important. So in some sense, there is an advocacy piece. And I also had this thought that we need to be very careful. I love the idea of some of the neo books having opinions, but I think that in contrast to a lot of journalism, we need to distinguish opinions from facts, whatever that is. Sorry, I don't know how often we have pure facts anywhere like news is supposed to be news is supposed to be objective just the facts, but it's always always shot through with opinions right so I don't know that we have an interesting manuscript that is merely facts without opinions. Yeah. Okay. If anybody else thinks you can separate them cleanly. Let me know like say so now. And Jose, I know that you have a great interest in having foundational facts and building up from their arguments so that they can be credible and comparable. I'm probably putting words in your mouth, but I think you have all of us here you may have the strongest feeling about facts in that sense, but I'm good. Could I just quickly respond to Stuart because he responded to me. Yeah, I agree with you it's both and but I think the emphasis is much more content creation, creating it's about telling people what to think. So I'm interesting more interested not only helping people to think but to think about how they think metacognition. So it's definitely both and you can't have that without the former. But I think so much of what we deal with is telling people what to think. It's just, it's content creation. It's not a process co creation. Rick is the metacognition need to be explicit or can that just be part of the work? No, no, no, it can be. No, I don't think it should be. Okay. I think, you know, you know, definitely you don't even have to use the word. Good. I'm just using there is a word for that. Yeah. To answer your questions, Jerry, I think the word facts in of itself is a problem right but the idea that there are understandings that we have and that to the best of our knowledge those understandings seem to reflect the reality. Though they don't always stand the test of time and that's fine. But if we actually have this idea that that understandings don't mean solid forever fixed things that our job is to actually improve our understandings. And that those understandings should be looked at from a first principles perspective rather than just sort of in the ether. Here's an understanding and I believe this thing. Okay, well, how does that relate to other understandings that allow for that to be for us to be able to judge whether it has a relationship to other understandings that have been over time stood the test of time. So, so to me the idea that we're not talking about facts because as you point out facts. First of all, most of the time we don't talk about facts. I don't think that's what humans were built to do. We just talk about concepts and whatever those concepts are for some of us those concepts relate to reality and others don't sometimes. So, so I don't think it's that issue. I think the issue for me is that the way we hold these understandings is loosely, and that the way we talk about things isn't about as absolutes, but as ways that have relationships to other understandings that you can't say, I, I love the fact that, you know, the rainbow has green and pink. I'm not sure where that rainbow has green and pink, but that the rainbow has the The rainbow is very simple or apparently that they have the spectrum of colors and then say, well, green and pink is one of them. You know, we know that that's not true because we have this understanding of the spectrum of colors. It's a reasonable way to look at things right. And so for us to be able to not leave things in the, in this space where we can't argue understanding through us. So through some level of logic and through some level of experience, I think is essential. Okay, and class for you, for example, there's a bunch of assertions about the small water cycle, the large water cycle, soil fertility. I mean, there's a bunch of stuff that you sometimes need to teach people because they just don't understand the effects of policy on all those different kinds of things, or how there might be new measures that are more fruitful and certainly how there are new industrial sort of paradigms that would be more, you know, better for the earth. I think that the facts basis is not that hard for you to jump on and think about right. No, and I was just thinking about facts and visions of the future and so on. The reason why the dawn of everything resonated so much with us, right, is because it, it sort of provided statistical probability of things happening depending on maybe you can compare to smoking. You know, if you smoke, you have a statistical chance of contracting cancer that's pretty down high, but it's not absolute. A lot of people smoke and are doing just fine. I think of George Burns, right, until the age of 100, smoking, puffing on his cigars. By and large, you're taking on risk. And so there are certain behaviors that societies and civilizations and people take that increases their risk of damaging their well being. And the, I think what I was really wanting to get into is that we have lost our relationship to the natural world. We have lost our relationship to the biosphere. And I'm trying to explain this as technical as necessary, but not more necessary, not more than necessary. So for example, the water cycle, the hydrologic cycle is actually turned out to be amazingly important because most of the climate models have ignored it or missed it and didn't incorporate how incredibly damaging or how the water cycle being changed accelerates the impact of climate change. So now that's really coming out. And guess what? The hydrologic cycle is loaded in soil. And when you damage the soil, it has so many things that are going wrong. So that sort of, I'm trying to connect, you know, past this future. I thought, I don't think you can look at the future without understanding the past. And that's why I started basically with the dawn of everything in the first new book and incorporated behavioral issues and the way we think. And yeah, go ahead. Very briefly, just before Stuart, just because it fits really well here, your mention of the dawn of everything reminds me of a different thing that I think we're trying to fight or clarify, which is aphorisms that are being used as if they were facts. Like when people say life was just nasty British and short before. And it wasn't right. No, it actually wasn't. But that's used as an assertion, as if it's everybody knows that this thing, but it's just a frickin aphorism, and it's wrong. Right. It's wrong entirely. Sorry, Stuart, back to you. So that's okay. No, what I was going to say is I would imagine that most of the pieces, most of the Neo books are going to involve painting with a broad brush. Here's what we've been doing, folks. Here's here's the here's where it's going to head if we keep doing it. And here's a different way of both thinking and acting. And here's a sense of how outcomes for the biosphere and all the people on it, all the humans on it and and other animals on it could be better. Whatever that means, if we if we follow a different line of thinking. Now, within what realms and in what way because I there's a couple articles that have happened just recently about the pandemic and lessons from the pandemic. And most of them say something like, well, experts are really mixed about what strategy was the best strategy to pursue as a national policy during the pandemic. And outcomes are kind of mixed and we are now no better prepared for a pandemic than we were before this thing struck except that we have mRNA vaccines, which by the way a whole bunch of people refuse to touch because mRNA it's crazy science stuff. And it's Bill Gates trying to inject chips into us so you can do mind control. And I'm like, and climate change feels to me like a much larger thornier problem than a pandemic. So how do we hope to make our way through the ticket of facts and assertions and interactions. That's a good. That's a good question Jerry I think in terms of our quote editorial policy whatever whatever that might be. Yeah. Cool. There's an article I'll post in the chat from Tom Nichols titled when experts fail, which is part of where I'm getting the that thread about the pandemic and us not understanding it well. So, despite the fact that I believe that that these things are so messy that sometimes we will have a really hard time figuring things out. I think and this is, I'm going to jump through a couple of different hoops here. I think people respond to stories and they respond to emotions. A lot. And it turns out that emotional stories are carrying the day right now and it's a problem because some of the stories that are emotional are completely completely bald faced lies wrapped up in some kind of story that has attached itself to a bunch of populations and is driving the political agenda as we live and breathe right now. I think part of what we're trying to do is intercept that and modify it or or affect it in some way so that people to perform better metacognition, stop listening to crazy stories and start finding reasonable stories. But I think the antidote to crazy stories might might in fact be other stories that appeal to emotion as well. I don't think the antidote is, hey, here's a perfectly logical set of facts lined up so well you can't refute them. I don't think that actually works. And I don't mean that nobody should write factual books anymore. I just mean that the dynamics that we're that I think all of us are interested in intercepting and shaping and affecting have to do also with stories. So how do you tell a compelling story and a story is a blend of anecdotes and opinions, with a couple facts sprinkled around, and if the facts pointed to obliquely by the story are supportable by your worldview. But here, like, what's this resting on and how solid is it, then awesome. And sometimes the stories. They they're an act of faith they're they're they're parables not, you know, parables sort of intentionally loosen you up from the world of science and facts. In order to prove something else. I don't know. I'm trying to make room for more of how large scale social contagion happens how large scale decisions happen so that we can still have that big effect. Because I feel like if we limit ourselves to rational structures of facts, we're going to be talking to, you know, a couple of dozen academics. And feel free to disagree with me. Excellent. I actually do agree with you. Because in some ways, I think, I think what we want in terms of impact is to have some of these ideas are, you know, some of the ideas and ways of thinking go viral. That's the real, you know, potential magic of progressive thinkers, you know. But are you talking about the virality of a new book or the virality of new books. And the viral and the virality of behavioral change as a result of it, the new books. So I think all of those things is what we're what we're looking for. We want to have some impact. That's why we're that's why we're doing it. Right. But I would. I would question that that if what we're saying is what's going to change things is doing more of the same. Then we're going to do more of the same and more of the same will continue to happen. If what we're changing is doing something different. Then hopefully that something different will find its own niche in its own way of resonating. And for me that that that's what I thought Neo books was so My focus isn't on old people like us. Right. What we've got is a new generation, my stepdaughters and some example my nephews and nieces as an example in their 20s, who are like, this is all fucked. Some of them aren't the drugs. Some of them are just working their ass off thinking that if they can work their ass off, something better will come of it. But for the most part, nothing is changing for them. And they're they're seeing that they don't see a road at the end of this. Yeah. Right. So for me, how do we speak to them in a way that's different. And these young people in my opinion, and this is an opinion, not a fact, recognize that they don't that they that the way we've been doing it doesn't work. And that it's not simply that we have a new narrative, but that the new narrative that we bring has a different way of being delivered in a different way of being engaged with. And so for me, that that's what I think is interesting about new books. It's not just the yes we need new narratives. Fine, agree with that. But we need to deliver those new narratives in a form that is so unique and so different and so open that in and of itself whatever the narrative is carries with it, the value of the delivery mechanism. I'll shut up at this point. I'll say thank you that actually I think you answered a piece of the question that I immediately wanted to jump in with, which is what which I just wrote in the chat. Like, I thought you were going to say what we need to change is this this rely over reliance on narratives and stories and we should go to logic. That's not what you're saying. I think you're saying that the act of interacting with a story or a narrative or a fact should change. And if we affect that we can change the quality of discourse and metacognition. And that should be pretty contagious that like like, and I'm completely I'm completely on board with that. That makes me very happy to hear. Because I think a big piece of what Nia books is meant to do. It's about idea sex. This is about how we come up with and compare ideas and change our minds about ideas, and then turn other people on to better ideas and whatever else and then how does that actually happen in the world. So I love that. And correct me if I'm going in a direction you didn't don't agree with. I think you're, I think that is it. But it's the important part I think is back to to the holding of of these ideas as things that everybody can play with. And that as an author, I don't get to put a whole bunch of ideas out there and say too bad so sad this is my idea and you're screwed. Right. It's a this is an idea let's let's all have a chance to play with his ideas because kids today from what I perceive. They're fed up with this person's the expert. Oh, they're they're they're over and done with all that shit. Yeah, I just came back from a, I'm sorry to jump in. It was a conference of teachers in international schools in Asia. And I couldn't agree with you more in terms of, you know, teaching methodology K through 12. Just that the idea of the expert standing in front of the room is just kind of gone. Thanks to class. Yeah, the reason why I introduced spiral dynamics into the discussion is because there is no such thing as one story that tells that that works for everybody. So I had, I had a meeting last week was a group of evangelicals who started the meeting by challenging me with a short video from some some guru that summarized how electric cars such as total nonsense and why this doesn't work and put out all the data points of how much of our energy is being generated between coal, oil and gas and what it would take to electrify the industry. So I started out by saying, yeah, I totally agree. It's not there are not enough minerals in the crowns to build enough batteries to power the entire fleet. It's just not going to work. Besides, we're learning things about batteries being sensitive to heat and cold in ways that diminished and so on and so on. But then I proceeded to say, now let's take a look at how God created this world. He could he put carbon into this world rear carbon. And then the way he's using this carbon is that some of it needs to be in the atmosphere because there it plays the role of regulating the temperature inside the atmosphere. And the rest he put into the crown and where it became coal, oil and gas because he didn't need that carbon in the atmosphere. Then what we have done is we are now picking up trillions of the of this so we understand where I'm going. It was God and we are interfering with God's creation. Now I had another meeting with a group of orange folks, business people and so on. And there you're talking about the incentive structures in the economy that are misallocated that are causing farmers to do things against their better knowing. And that is damaging and destroying their soil and the environment and the water tables and so on. So that same story now has to be has to be placed into the context of your audience. So I'm trying to write in fact, you know, I'm using AI for writing my stuff. And the attempt is to go beige to yellow on writing so that it is partly understood. It's generic enough to not to not create any absolutes for any for any worldview where they exit. So so the the the message, whatever you're trying to explain and bring across to your audience really has to start with what you're talking with. When you said orange people, I started thinking of Mr. Trump. I didn't know exactly who you're talking about. No, he's thinking about his hairdo, not his complexion and his hair. Yes. Yeah, no, but Trump is actually in the red spectrum. And Maga followers are in the red spectrum, which makes it so very dangerous. I have a huge collection of nicknames for Trump and the orange system misogyny, the orange God King, the orange Julius Caesar and the orange face furor are several of them that do use orange. There's also the giant orange Twitter egg. That's from before Elon taking over Twitter. He's a perfect example of orange where they're completely materialistic, completely returned to us. There's a couple more oranges, the orange overlord of absurdities and the sneering orange man child. People have been very creative. And I did not make and then you can get close to orange mad the mad tangerine colored commissar is one of them too. So these are all actually quotes from someone somewhere deciding to needle Trump's look what that got us. So what, where does this take us with regard to the agreement and what we said on the agreement has what we've just talked about elaborated on our definition in the working document. And I felt there were some things where I felt the categories didn't quite fit and I put some words in there but actually I wanted to pick up on a point that Jose was talking about earlier about the younger generation. And I just want to share some very brief family stories. One of which was, I'm involved in another group where there's somebody there who heads up an organization called filmio and filmio is an organization that is a counterculture revolution to Hollywood. It's trying to get a platform creators together where they can crowdsource funding collaborate and come up with things that are more relevant than what our cultural hegemony of Hollywood and China and Bollywood whatever does to us. And it so happens my my nephew is he's half English half Indian, and he's at Bristol University and he's at film school. And he sent me something about his little video clip that he did as a school project and I thought this was brilliant. I mean it was really good. It's got a great talking boss video. And anyway, after that he sent me a crowdfunding thing he needed 1500 pounds for his group of students to actually do this project. And I think it's a great idea as you know get some money to be able to do your, you know, that's what, you know, films have to do. So anyway, I sent a note to the CEO of this organization and I said, Have you thought about connecting up with film schools globally and creating and doing exactly what he's doing but within filmio. And he was very, he was very taken by the idea and he said, you know, maybe you should, you know, speak to your nephew and see if you'd like to have a zoom conversation with the students. And I thought, Wow, this is great. Well, I sent some more ideas back to him. So that's just an, you know, an example of a catalyst. And then the other one was, I was watching, I can't remember where it was. Anyway, it was Yvonne Harari who's come out with a second book about unstoppable, unstoppable us and I didn't realize it was a two-part book. Anyway, I decided to get them from my grandson. And it so happens it's my 17th birthday today and I said I would give them today. No way. You took this long to tell us. Anyway, so I said, I would give I don't accept presents anymore. I say you can take me out to meals, whatever, but I don't want presents, but I said, I'll give you a present on my birthday. So he's coming over it. I have to pick him up from the bus stop and we'll come home and start reading this book. But the point of the stories actually is to tap into the intergenerational aspects of these books that, you know, similar to what, you know, class was talking about, we have to think about sort of generational or, you know, emotional development, intellectual development, moral development about what's appropriate different ages. And I have no idea how he's going to take this book, but I thought I would sit down and start reading with it. Maybe just a little head of his reading age, but I'll find out at 415 today. So, my inspire all the grandfathers and fathers here is to think about how you can actually inspire the younger generation with some hope and I think that's what near books have to do. If it doesn't, if it, if it does, by the way, I went to see John Patisse on Friday night. Unbelievable experience. Unbelievable. The guy, I just went on vacation in New Orleans and had a week down there with my, my, my Sibs and came back and watched that and having watched him, his performance because I'd been touring in New Orleans. It gave me a much better feel for his music and he's got so many virtuous songs, freedom, joy, whatever. And he's just a, he's just a musical subant. He's just unbelievable. Anyway, that is my, I mean, what I'm trying to convey is the spirit of what I'm saying is something that needs to be in these books. It has to be uplifting. It has to be something that people are attracted to because they don't want to put up with this shit anymore. I'm Rick and I'm done speaking. That's great. If I were you, I would check YouTube to see who's written a short review of Unstoppable Us because he would likely have watched that. The shortcut is go, go find somebody intelligent who wrote a summary or gives you an opinion about this long book. You're probably never going to make it through. You just muted yourself back. It's not too bad, actually. He's an avid reader. He loves book. He goes to the library and gets 20 books out of time. Damn. I mean, he's just, yeah. I mean, he's, I just, I said, no, you've got enough. Oh, no, no, I want to take more books. I want to take more books. So he's a, he's a, he's a bookworm. So maybe he will get through it. We'll find out anyway. Thanks. I just did a quick YouTube search. Yeah. So Jerry, in response to your question, I think the conversation has expanded clarified, you know, a couple of great ideas have come up from the dialogue to me, you know, that the books need to be inspirational. They need to be forward thinking. They need to be multi-generational. Yeah. And they need to change minds. So that's what I, that's what I've, I heard and that's great in terms of, you know, editorial policy. And they also need to be open-ended. Yeah. And now that I'm talking, I just wanted to acknowledge Klaus and I actually, I didn't cite you by name because nobody would have known who you are, but I actually talked about the methodology of using AI to focus on constructing advocacy for different audiences of important ideas and kind of a metaeducator saluted that as a methodology and a way to use AI. Cool. So do we want to update the text in the spreadsheet or we just want to have, walk through these conversations? I don't think the spreadsheet is something we're working on as a leave behind document that needs to be correct or that we need to all agree on. I think it's sparking the conversations we need to have. I agree. That's the, that's the, that's the intention. Cool. Shall we shift to roles or are we done with, I don't know that we're done with intent and vision, but I just push back a little bit on what Stuart just said. I think the books, obviously what we want is books or material out there that does help us to change things. But I think the only way we do it differently is through a different way of seeing Neo books itself. In other words, it's the old thing, right? You can't change something by doing the same old thing, right? Part of what I think is important, what really excited me about the idea of Neo books isn't that we're going to write a whole bunch of different books that are better, which I hope we do, but that there is a, an idea that the book as it was isn't serving us anymore. And so that to me, whatever we serve up on that platter is going to be different, even if it speaks in the same way that the traditional book did. If it's served up on a Neo books platter, then I think it's served, we're serving something different. And so that's my trying to really not focus so much on what we create, but on how it's created and what it is. Not, not just the content of the stuff, but that that content is different in how we, it's perceived by the audience and by us, right? Yeah, so great. So I have a, my reaction to that, Jose is, and it's important. In some ways just calling it a book, even though it's a Neo book, but just using the word book, it's a loaded word. And maybe we need to have a better term. I agree with that. Well, so the Neo books is, is bait. It's basically it's a decoy. The book part of Neo books is a decoy, because it gives us a starting place just like Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. And everybody's like, Oh, okay, I know what an encyclopedia is they show up and they expect an encyclopedia. And so one aspect one facet of what Neo books should deliver is something that looks and smells and talks like a book, except the much more interesting vital alive connected useful thing is in the network connected alive living embers nuggets whatever that the that compose the Neo book and other Neo books that are woven through it. And at some point you lose the need to be manifesting any of this stuff as a book, and you're just in the mycelial web of ideas and arguments basically living in there in some way And Jose, I think probably I've limited my imaginative thinking about what the next more exciting thing could look like by focusing on how do we get a damn the book out of this that looks like a book. And I think that's probably influenced my not going full board and I'm curious whether you've had any visions, even in your dreams of what that environment could look like and smell like because the closest I get to it. I think these days is, hey, a nugget or an ember has are in its orbits, a bunch of manifestations of that idea that's in that nugget, some of which are animations in video and they're really cool. Now I'm trapped in YouTube, but at least I've got something more interesting than a block of text in a in a Kindle book, right. Okay, but what what else could this be how else does this get more exciting. How does it become the all singing all dancing possibility of the future. I think that's a lovely question to ask that I, I'm wondering who has good answers for that. And I don't think we're talking about exploratory fiction platforms. I don't think we're talking about three dimensional cartoons, but I'm not sure what it is we're talking about at that frontier. I like that frontier a lot. I'm curious what's out there. For me it's. Yeah, just to expand a little bit on more Jerry said, I think we need to produce a few of them and to see that and to have those examples of what they are as emergent phenomenon, rather than try to define it. Going in. Go ahead. I was just going to say that for me that the vision that this slowly been building for me is the blend of Wikipedia. A kind of book idea but but not really book and Instagram that instead of the Instagram posts that it's the nuggets. And that the nuggets are part of a big combination of nuggets. I'm using your terminology Jerry here. Thanks, but but that that these pieces standalone. They can be seen and interacted with as videos as text as images as whatever that when you click on it you don't just like it you can actually go and then. And engage with it and go into it. Yeah, right. And that it's that the idea that we're talking about something that has a beginning and an end. For kids, I think it's gone. I think it's just bits and pieces that resonate today and don't resonate tomorrow and something else will resonate the day after and then and being able to engage and be a part of it. And right now the way that they're doing it is they'll, they'll take something on Instagram and then they'll add their view to it on top of it and add their words to it add their music to it and their text to it. How do we create an environment where we're actually having not just memes that are fun and cute and all of that stuff but means that actually have understanding behind them. And I don't think we can buck the trend of what's happening in social media. I think we actually have to buy into that. So when when the words that we're talking about, you know, that this has got to be in a wiki. I think that's wrong. Personally, that this has to be in a and an environment that feels like Wikipedia. I think that's that that's just the opposite of where we need to be going. We need to offer those things in this new in this new world in this new lens. In other words, the only reason to bring in Wikipedia into this isn't to make it look like a Wikipedia, but to have the functionality of wikis within this type of platform. So to me, we're talking about a brand new platform. We're not talking about making do with the pieces we already have that are old school pieces. And to what Klaus has said before, it needs to be something that I log on and is exciting. Here's a whole bunch of these names happening. Yeah. Here's here's it's not yeah it's part of a narrative it's part of a book, but I could consume them one by one by one. And it could be that three of my nuggets from my book are in the first 10, and then the next three of somebody else's in the next three of somebody else's. And I can engage with the one that I want and I want to follow that that narrative. Let me follow that narrative I want to see that narrative. And let me engage with that narrative that's that's what I'm seeing Jerry. Thank you very much. Thanks. Thanks. That was really useful. Yeah, I think that's pretty much where we left off in the last meeting. I think we have sort of exhausted the conversation about wiki books, what wiki books on what they could be and what they're not. And of course, we keep going around, but the question is, what are we going to do with them when we have some examples and we talked about using a platform that compartmentalizing new books by topic, whichever way that works best to providing an introduction website introductory note of what what we're trying to accomplish here what this is. And you have a site for new books and let people play with it. Let them challenge the assumptions made in the book, let them talk about it. The discussion for a moment. And that's, I mean, I just think we're more than ready to proceed with that and and get going. Because, I mean, I'm, I'm blogging along. I just got my next topic for for the next nugget for my new book lined up. And the way I'm writing the new book is following along the the routes that sort of the consensus opinion as I pick it up on LinkedIn and other chat rooms and so on. As the conversation advances, you know, and topics that come up I write another nugget. And then I put it in there. But I think we're really, we're really overdue to launch this thing and maybe have a conversation about how best to do this how are we going to go about the design of this platform. Write an introduction to it and so on. Now, before moving on to Stuart and Jose for a second, rich burden who has invented a platform joined us for free Jerry's brain a couple weeks ago and demoed his platform for us. It's new it's not out in the world yet so he didn't want us to record the thing so I have no recording of that call unfortunately, but it was a platform that smells like Google workspace. It has lots of different apps that are as polished as Google docs and so forth, but then you can basically load different apps into that space. There could be a whole ecosystem of apps. And he showed us an app that was just a chess game, where you could you know, interactively move, move pieces and it would move on, however many connected desktops were looking at that particular chess game, because he had built multi site sort of sink into the platform etc. The good thing about it is that it looked very normal to somebody who's used to using Google workspace. The bad thing about it is, it's brand new. And then one of the very very technical people on the call had an issue with sort of URLs in it, which are sort of internal and not external. And for that philosophically he was like, No, no, it doesn't work for me and I was like, Hey, this actually looks like a really smooth wonderful platform we might be able to use this. Anyway, there's some things on offer that are just part of our networks as networks because I've known rich burden for a long time. Pete Kaminsky used to work with rich burden at one of riches startups long ago, and rich was strangely the CTO of the brain for a year in the brains early early early going in the very late 90s. So any, and I didn't meet him until much later than that but but it's an interesting alternative. Now we go to Stuart and Rick. You're muted. We're going to get a perfect segue into talking about roles because if we're going to, if we're going to actually produce something. Who's going to, who's going to do what, who's going to take responsibility for what in terms of getting getting particular functionality done, so that we can produce a product. Sounds great. I could just elaborate on that a little bit in terms of how to do it as you would. You know, the word book was questioned. I thought it was a good question to question about the book. But actually what it did made me think about is the issue of Neo, because, you know, to me, what came to mind was netbooks rather Neo books because the netbook is something is networking. You know, I think framing and marketing is critically important. I don't know if there's a substitute word for book. I mean, net co lab doesn't convey the book idea. So I wouldn't, you know, throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's just a question of how you reframe it. And this is just top of my reaction. So it needs more thought. But the idea of a netbook to me conveys some of that aspect. And what Jose was talking about earlier is, you know, we're never going to find the perfect platform. And we're going to be, we're going to be victims of whatever platforms are out there. So, Rod, how can we co-op current social media platforms more effectively to be able to do this, whether it's LinkedIn or whatever platform people are on. So you have to go where the people are because you're not going to draw them their new platform. Or if you are, you're going to have to have some huge amount of funding to pull it off. But I actually, it's funny because I just put the film link in there. And I just thought of, okay, what happens if you were to combine this with a film, you know, a documentary that there is a theme. And then you have a new book that that's it up. Then you do the movie. And you then do a new book that's ongoing based upon the impact of the movie. And, you know, I think we just have to think in different. That idea just came to me while I just shared. But thinking about how to link into different media in order to be able to draw an audience. So I don't know what people's reactions are to the net book idea opposed to a new book. Net book is a branded trademark up and down. Like you can go buy a Google powered net book. There's tons of them in the marketplace. The term is actually rigidly in use right now in the marketplace. I'm not sure. Okay. I like I like your connections a lot. I just don't think that we can use that term and that's fine. That's fine. But it's more the idea of the purpose because to me, Neo just means new book to me and co lab book or something that, you know, gets across the idea that you're having it. You're having a learning community around it. So my personal history around this is that really quite often I've written about the future very with some clarity. I'd never invented the thing that became commonplace. But actually I have a thought in my brain I'll share with you guys of stories that I because I've been thinking about this, as I'm trying to tell my own story better. But I have often described a thing that shows up a few years later. So I wrote an issue of the of Esther's newsletter called what's a zine. And I borrowed the word zine from short small circulation and hand Xeroxed stapled, you know, personal newsletters that people did. But in the issue of what's a zine I describe web logs. And like three four years later web logs show up and take off and eat the world. And I've done and I've done a bunch of that a bunch of different times. I never picked the right name. But if we sit here and worry about the names and argue about them and go back to that every time we have a call, we're never going to actually get the work done. So if I may just run the table as project lead and say, can we just call them neobooks can we call them nuggets for a bit. And can we move through this thing to the point where we realize, oh shit, we should never have called them nuggets. We need to call them parameters adapters later down the road. And I have a side project I mentioned earlier in this call called the big fungus.org and maybe we call them high fade because the little growth edges of my serial networks are called high fade. And isn't that cool, but a couple of other people have used high fade for their project names because they love the metaphor and I love the metaphor. So I don't really want to get hung up on in our and on a lot of OGM projects we've gotten hung up on terminology. I tried to, you know, early in OGM I tried to have us organize into guilds and go on quests. That did not sell. It's a great organizing principle because it gives you stuff that you can animate and connect to it. Well, I hear your frustration, Jerry, and I'm quite happy to move on into the role aspect of it. And one of the things about the role aspect of it is what can we do. For example, Klaus, you seem to be taking lead with your new book and I made some comments on one of them. But actually having much more conservative effort in the co-creation of the new book that if we decide to use LinkedIn, for example, that we all commit ourselves instead of having conversations just here that if you have elements of your book that you're writing and a way of getting peer review and reactions to it is that we'll commit in our roles to make a point of commenting and commenting on each other and inviting the community to do the same. I don't know whether that would be helpful for you, Klaus, or whether it's going to be a complete distraction. Well, it's helpful to me because my professional network resides on LinkedIn. That may not be true for what Jose is doing. And maybe Facebook is a better option here or whatever. Well, we all agree, whatever platform people prefer to be on, that if you're taking the lead or LinkedIn, let's all commit ourselves, you let us know. And actually from what I understand from the algorithms, if you can actually release it and everyone starts commenting on it, it helps to promote the thing. Now, whether that's still true or not, but within a couple of hours, if you release at your Thursday meeting, for example, where there are more people and you say, everyone, go there after this call. This is what it looks like. And then get everyone to go and write comments on it. This is all good. But I would still like for OGM to have a platform that we can lead back to. Oh, that's fine. Oh, yeah. Both hands. But I'm just saying this is part of the writing process so that one of the things is that, you know, I'm involved in writing products with different academics and, you know, it's all messy and whatever. But, you know, the more input, and if you have that co-creative process as the part of building up to it, then, you know, that's what I love. I mean, I love, I just got some feedback from an article I sent to somebody and they sent me. It was great. And they even used AI to get some more ideas about my writing, which I thought was interesting. So a couple of just a moment for a second. We have currently, there is an OGM group on LinkedIn. We just don't use it at all for conversations. But it exists. I created it so that OGM could look like an organization. We could go in there and start talking about the Neo Books project and that would be completely legit and really cool. We also, Pete and I created a sub-stack for Neo Books with the explicit intention of using something as popular as sub-stack to try out nuggets that we've each written. So, Klaus, I think part of the proposal to you was take pieces of things that you would normally write on a blog post or put wherever else, put them through sub-stack. We will then create a nugget for that particular piece of writing and put it on the web presence so that people can come back and find it. Because the part that's thorny is that we haven't figured out a good way to interact with nuggets yet. We tried to have that conversation here. That kind of didn't work very well. But people can write comments on sub-stack posts. So co-opting existing social media would work really well. And we've got a bunch of things that we're good at. And once we've floated one piece through that process, we can go back to OGM and say, hey, OGMers, please go on LinkedIn. Like this. Comment on it. Go to the sub-stack. Subscribe to the sub-stack. Send us in your contributions if you want. Join us in this effort. And here's where and how it works. And we can do that with existing stuff like LinkedIn and sub-stack without worrying about writing new code or doing whatever else. And that's at hand right now. Is it good? All right. Stuart, thanks for being patient. Yeah, no, no worry. So I'm just going to throw out some thoughts about what we need to actually get into production in terms of people taking responsibility for certain things. It's just my ideas. So we need editorial, obviously, in some ways. You know, I'm not sure exactly what that means. That's for us to come up with a policy, but we need somebody to take a look at stuff. We need something to do with technology. We need something to do with delivery, marketing, distribution, PR. I've lumped all those things together, getting stuff out there. And I don't know the thought about just process, a process person for how we do that. So those are my thoughts to get us moving into productivity. So we had a, we had a Neobooks call a couple months ago, I think it might have been in your middle of your travels, where we kind of updated on all of this and I was like, Hey, Pete and I talked about this and the gaping hole right now is editorial. Like, like it takes actual editors and a bunch of time to turn a manuscript into a finished book looking book. We're trying to hack our way through that and we realized that unlike a small press that would have editors on hand, Neobooks doesn't have the wherewithal to do that. And we sort of said, we need to source that some other way and there's lots of, you know, useful ways of doing that, including just somebody hiring an editor if they want to. So Pete and I are kind of the technology pair. I can't code to save my life, but he can. And we've been trying to help improve the platform, the, the wick, the massive wiki platform so that it can sing and dance and do some of these things. I think that a lot of the things we wish we had or could do are within the vision and scope of Pete and massive wiki. The problem is very little of that code has been written yet and the process of asking for and getting pieces of it written is really kind of slow and isn't working that well. Marketing distribution we're going to need and we've done a little bit of thinking about, but not a ton, but the moment we have an artifact we want to propel into the world. There's a lot of help on that there's a lot of, there's a lot of stuff we could do that are quick wins I'm not I'm not as concerned about marketing and distribution. And then I'm trying to document some of this process on the wiki pages that I'm writing. I'm not really the only one doing that at this point but I'd like to do more of it and have other people collaborate on that as well, so that if somebody joins up and says gosh, this new books thing sounds cool what is it. Boom, go here for the new books intro stuff. Okay, great. I'd like to, I'd like to write one or I'd like to improve other people's new books. How do I do that. Okay, boom, go here. Okay good I'd like to create one. How do I do that. Okay, start here. And each of those is a narrative trail of nuggets that are connected up into answering each of those questions. That's great. Jerry, thank you. I mean that's that's really good so there's a lot of, there's a lot of pieces that that are in place. As you talk, I think about the word editorial and you talked about it being, you know, a little bit challenging. There are two aspects of that I think that are important. One, what's our editorial policy. I think it's very congruent with the intent and vision we have but it's important to have, you know, some degree of amorphous clarity around that oxymoronic as that may seem. But also the process of, you know, how stuff gets, you know, looked at reviewed in some ways. Okay. Yeah. I don't know if I, if I'm polyadysh around this but for some reason, I don't see editorial as a big as a big problem. From your lips to God's ears to it. Maybe it maybe it's because part just personally, I'm a reasonably quick study in content. I know it's really interesting, you know, somebody asked Jennifer to write a blurb for a, you know, a book that they were working on and she was kind of struggling with it and needing to drill down into all the detail of a book. And I've been writing blurbs for quite some time. And it's just like a simple no brainer for me to do that and do it quickly. Yeah. I would just say like honey, fan through the book, wave it over some food and a candle, put it up against your forehead and then write whatever comes. Um, Dave, I, I, I'm trying, I think I need more time to think about your question in the chat. I think there is a, there's a, there's a social dynamics that's like Wikipedia but different, which is about the community part of Neo books and the living document part of it. There's a channels out into the world as medium substack or also YouTube channels, other sorts of things aspect to it, which is how does this stuff find people who need to use it. And then there's something else that's better richer, more interesting than those things that is part of the conversation that Jose was bringing into into our call here, which is how do we go beyond and make this like a vital attractive, exciting thing to be part of so that it feels like community when you're in it, doing the Neo books thing which shall be renamed in the future. Does that help a bit Dave. I was trying to, I was like, because I feel like I think I've been thinking of the Neo books kind of as a, as a model or like almost like a protocol or something it's like a set of ideas I would like to try to use kind of but at some of this conversation was like it's more like a destination, where kind of a knowledge is growing and being aggregated and growing, which was the wicked, you know, like a Wikipedia thing. You know, and so that was a little bit I was like, do we want is it is the destination important, or is that a byproduct of the of having the other stuff I don't know. I think, think of it as a journey, not a destination. Like a website that's, you know, got got traffic. I think what I was asking for earlier we do need which is like, hey, this Neo books project sounds like a fun thing where do I go to learn more. And that needs to be a URL that people can reliably go to and we'll keep getting, you know, more information. But I don't think that that becomes the hub of all Neo books I think Neo books are a set of protocols and concepts, more like the first thing you talked about. And then that, hopefully, the, the reason we're using stupid things like markdown and GitHub is that that opens up collaboration, big time, because those are very simple tools, anybody can connect up with. And it's a very simple structure protocol, and you're off to the races, as soon as you get engagement, but because we're trying to figure out all these things that once we don't have engagement because we don't have thing out the door. And the quicker we get something out the door with a placeholder website that says hey, here's where you learn more and what to do the better. Yeah, I think there's two audiences here. One is the reader, the people who just want to participate versus the content and process co creatives. I think I would like to be on a wiki with the co creators, you know, the people who are actually interested in doing the work. And then there's the people who want to engage in the work and I think it's important to have different strategies for those two categories. Agreed. And part of what we're trying to do is attract some of the passive readers to be community. Exactly. Exactly. Which is a piece of what Wikipedia does strangely enough because Wikipedia is like just this big encyclopedia that billions of people go and use all the time. And then they were like, Oh, wait a minute. There's an edit this page button on here. What's that. And once they figure out that exactly a few of them, a few of them joined the community, not a lot. But when a few of a whole bunch of when you have a huge bunch of traffic and a couple of those people joined the community, that's super fruitful. That's really. I go ahead and say, I was just going to agree with what Rick said, though I didn't know I was going to say that. But, but I also think that making that split between what we, the protocol that we're building defining, which we really haven't talked about. And the fact that that protocol could live anywhere in social media and have the means to identify that protocol anywhere. So that if if anything that we publish linked in Instagram, wherever has been part of this protocol, then there's this ability to get back to this central place that that says, here's what the protocols about. Here's how it works. Here's who's who can use it. And if you'd like to engage, come on in. So I'm liking more and more the idea that there is a central repository from a protocol perspective, and not the so centralized use of that protocol in different places. Thanks. Yeah, so I feel a little bit like tit for tat earlier in the call Jose pushed back on me so I'll push back on it on him now. And that is, you know, you said protocol which we haven't talked about. And quote, I think we've talked about it quite a bit. You know, we haven't named it as protocol but I think we've talked about it a lot in terms of just what it is that we're that we're doing and what we want to do and, and how we're going to do it. I think for me, there's a difference between and maybe all along that's been true. So I may be wrong but there's a difference between talking about a product and a protocol. To me, the idea of a protocol is a set of standards that you could build your own product out of. And, and it doesn't have to be centralized. Here's the protocol. Are you working with the protocol, I can go up and stand up my own use of new books using the protocol and I, and I do it and that's all that to me sounding more interesting than a centralized set of tools that everybody kind of has to use. Whereas the protocol is here. Here's what a new book looks like as long as it does ABCD. It's a new book. It's interoperable. It works. It has this features all of that kind of stuff. If we were to talk about that. Then we wouldn't be talking about what tool constitutes the protocol. Okay. Now, I, I, I get that. And the thing that just pops up is as important is some editorial quote policy around content. You know, and, and, and what my concern around that is, is, you know, I go back to the statement that Schmacktenberger made at one point in time that there will always be people outside of the edges of any initiative that are going to subvert it in some ways. Yeah. Cool. We have run through our time. This has been really useful. More soon. I think I have, I have my question. One last question for how can we help, how can we help you. We don't have to ask, respond to it here now. But I just feel like, you know, part of this role is you're, if you're, if you're the spearhead, so to speak, an initiative. How can we help you have a meeting with Pete on Thursday to, to see how we can do the integration with AI with the options here. But I'm also using it professionally. We would like to, to integrate AI and the services that we offer to farmers and to, we're just starting to work with a farm coop in the Palouse and to others, because it is just incredibly powerful, you know, when you And so other than that, the way you can help me is to get this thing going. I would say, I would say the same thing with the body of content that I'm working on also. Let's, let's get this going and, and figure out the emergence. I also wanted to make one other comment on the agreement piece. We're hitting the high points. I think many of the other elements in it just need to be punctuated in a quick way. I think we've done the hard, the more difficult heavy lifting at this point in time in terms of creating a container for what it is we're up to. Cool. One last question for Klaus before we take off. Klaus, are you more interested now in a chat interface to your, the body of work you're writing than a, an ebook? I think we need to combine this. The, the, or I mean, when you say ebook, you mean making making a Kindle book version of your, of your manuscript. Yes. I'm far more interested in getting an AI interface because I think that the way that, that AI is evolving now, you know, this latest, I attended a presentation by Sam Altman. I didn't attend. I mean, I watched a video from Sam Altman discussion. The way he is proceeding is we could maybe best be described as radical decentralization. So, so he is really allowing this whole thing to fall apart into pieces and see who picks up what. And as it turns out, the quality of this AI depends entirely on the way it has been trained and the ability of the individuals training it. And in order to maintain the integrity of that, you need to have a user interface. So that's what I'm basically discussing with Pete is to create a user interface. Then you encourage discussions, right? And then as you are encouraging discussions, you're trained, you're further training the AI because if people raise legitimate concerns or point out gaps, the AI will pick up on it in advance. So that's why I think the Neo Book bringing people to it and having them engage with it, asking questions or making statements, challenging the assumptions is the most powerful thing we can do to create a common understanding of what is real. What is our closest, best available understanding of reality is what I'm after. Do you mind checking in with us at the start of next Monday's Neo Books call on how that conversation goes and where you end up? And Pete might be on that call with us, but I'd love to start there. That'd be great. Terrific. Thank you all. Thank you. Been a pleasure. Thank you. More soon. Good to see you again, Stuart. Great to see you. Thanks.