 Hey, Mike. Good morning, Doug. How are you doing today? Good, Mike. That's Mark. Sorry. It's okay. I can't hear very well anyway. I basically listen to a little too much punk rock in my, in my youth. Well, fortunately, technology can help, I guess, by boosting the audio. So we were going to have a talk at some time. Yeah, it's a do weekends work for you. Usually my wife and I both paint, and we've had open studio the last couple of weekends. And this weekend is going to be kind of cleanup so it's a little tricky but the weekend after is that good. Yeah, if I can, if I can remember. So I will try. Well, I'll, I'll, I'll nudge you with an email. And I'll nudge you from time to time. I'm kind of, you know, spontaneous connection works for me. Well, actually try it's try that because probably half the time that works. Yeah, good. Hi Jerry. Good morning. Morning. Is Jerry talking we can't hear you. Do you hear me? Okay, every now and then I have to replug my ear my headset and it's kind of weird. Your background is blue your chair is blue and your shirt is blue it all goes together. I come from planet blue. We are not permitted to wear anything else. The blue is, I guess doing very well and our friend the Euro 2020s, I think I was just going to say that. Yeah. Yeah, as opposed to the Azuri, and actually the Azuri are doing pretty well too. The Azuri, that would be the Italians right exactly who are also blue. Yes, okay. I remember being in North Beach when the Italians won the World Cup we watched it at a Italian bar. Boy, oh boy was that fun. Oh that must be fun. Yeah. I went to a game in San Francisco that involved the Brazil team, and it was a Brazilian bar, and it was just wild and crazy but Brazil lost. Yes. Was that the German. No, it wasn't the German disaster. This was a crazy thing to watch. Yeah. You know, good for the Germans. Maybe, maybe the Brazilians will learn less Sheldon Freud. Exactly. Hey, Gil, how you doing. Good morning, folks. Morning. I'm going to probably have to leave about nine today. Okay. Sounds cool. I was going to say when I when nobody could hear me I was saying that it's supposed to get close to 98 or something like that this week here, and we've got I think mild temperatures relative to the heat wave that's whacking across the southwest of the country so LA Times had interesting story this morning, talking about both the heat and historic dryness which is a bad combination. And there's an article in the New York Times this morning. I think it's the times that says that the earth is absorbing way more heat than the, than the estimates had so. Yeah. Things are not going well. Yeah. Well it's gonna be the story for a while now. It is. Actually, it's not it's a Washington Post story I'll paste it in the matter most chat. Matter most. Yeah. So many tabs so little time. Exactly, exactly. It's raining websites. I love brain box, but I got to spend regular time harvesting that don't I. You do exactly. And the thing Gil just mentioned is gill is experimenting with the brain the software that I like to use. And there's a way you can email yourself links basically you can bookmark them for later retrieval and curation, and the little artifact is called brain box because it's a little icon of the box in the corner that you then click on and it says hey, here's all the stuff that's stacked up for you to put away. And I, I forget it's there because I usually go straight and curate stuff, you know directly into the brain. I've also been experimenting with obsidian as potentially a better writing environments in the brain is, but it doesn't have that harvesting function. It's more of a manual task there. So, we should do another show and tell at some point because there's a whole bunch of people that are in the cult of Rome, there's a subtle, subtle custom fan clubs, there's a whole bunch of different kinds of communities built up around these different tools. Each of which is going a little frothy and crazy in their own tool set. And I don't see a lot of cross pollination which would be really interesting. And each of which has people with voluminous YouTube offerings about what my workflow isn't how I do all this it's you know, pretending to be the answer but it's not personal idiosyncratic and so forth but in particular Jerry I'm not seeing a lot of the cross verbalization so I'm real interested in in the flow between the brain and something like obsidian Rome would have you. I completely agree. Totally agree. And then there's, then there's the, you know, the OGM list was gotten very busy this last week or two. It has I can barely keep up and I've got comments I want to make back and I'm like, wow, where's this all go. I know, it's kind of crazy. Hey everybody welcome to the Thursday check in call. I think Paul Crafell nicely pointed out last week afterward that the general rhythm of this and he's totally right because this is just what I've been doing is that as everybody speaks I jump in and I sort of take a turn at that. If they said something that I can add to or whatever I jump in, and so forth, and I think that partly partly that's a piece of what makes these calls work and partly that's an assumption about things and how they work that doesn't need to happen. There's a side conversation happening about let's experiment with the Thursday calls and much more interesting and radical ways, but but today maybe what I'll do is as people check in I'll just be quiet for a little bit and see who else wants to jump in and take a turn and we'll do a real little experiment that way. With this, but, but of course, of course, I find it irresistible to pitch in with what I've seen and what's going on so I will bite my tongue for a little bit. What I think about is, it would be great to alternate hosts, for example, for this call perhaps and it would be lovely to alternate hosts with somebody who is not a older white guy like me. So if you know anybody who think who would like to be, you know, take a turn give it a try. That would be awesome I'd love to talk with them. There are no older white guys like you Jerry. I love being thought of as sweet generous but but hey, there we go. Awesome. Grace, thank you for joining us. Thanks for being here. Our normal habit here as we go around the, I go into gallery view and I sort of, if somebody didn't make it into the room last week I start with them, and then I kind of work my way through a little bit who's here. There's no deliverables from this call this is these these calls are not goal oriented they're just I call it sort of dip and mix where I'm sort of dipping the ladle into the stream of activities that all of us are into that have anything to do with open global mind, which is the general umbrella here. And then when interesting things show up we kind of mix the pot a little bit and people we pitch in and help each other we offer perspectives or articles or whatever else is going on. And this perfectly find a path as we go around so if you don't feel like stepping in that's great too. And I will begin today actually with Ken Phil Anthony. I know first Ken, how's that. Not sure I was prepared for that. Hello everybody good morning after an evening wherever you might be in the world. I see some, some new faces here and some old faces got spent a while since you've been here welcome back. Oh, let me see what am I doing. I'm reading Bob Johansson's new book called full spectrum thinking Bob Johansson is a past president and now distinguished fellow at the Institute for the future. And this book is all about moving beyond categories into what Robert Gilman would call the same things as territories and recognizing you can have multiple maps for the same territory. And one of the things he talks about is that the future getting the next 10 years be very, very difficult. It's also filled with amazing opportunities and will there'll be a shift for people who are successful in moving from certainty to clarity. So you'll know where you want to go. Yes, go they only do 10 years at a time at the Institute for the future but what's interesting is they go back at least 50. So they're working with a 60 year timeframe. They find that I was just laughing the thought that only 10 years are going to be difficult. Yeah, I think I think we're for longer than that but the next 10 years going to be particularly challenging. So it, it goes back at least 50 years looking for signals, and then projects out 10 years in the future and they use a hindsight foresight insight and action model. And this thing that really caught my eye is is moving from certainty to clarity that you'll know where you want to go, but you'll be very, very flexible with how about how you'll get there and Jerry I was thinking about April's flux mindset because it seems completely congruent with what Bob's talking about in full spectrum thinking. So that's just kind of on my mind right now, as we're sifting through our opportunities here is as GM, and there was something else I just read this morning. Related to that read OGM in the book which Yeah, I think it's it's, there's a lot of talk in OGM about the future but there's not a lot of talk about what, but the exception of our good pal Doug Carmichael of really looking back over the last 50 years and what are the signals that we could be using to inform our view of how to get where we want to go to securing our future. So I just thought I'd throw that out as as perhaps a really interesting conversation starter. Good to be here. Hope everybody's doing well it's getting hot here in California. Thanks Ken and I will resist all my urges to jump in right the second and see if anybody else would like to do so because I was about to break discipline right there because everything you said was exciting to me, but anybody else who'd like to jump in please feel free. Go ahead. Anthony Phil me. Okay. Didn't mean to jump out it's okay anyways, the, I'm work on very interesting video I saw a couple of couple weeks ago featuring. I'm in the systems thinking and Derek Cabrera his life Laura, Gerald Midgley, Brad. Taylor, they're pretty, they're pretty, at least what I could gather pretty high up there in terms of being a sort of part of people on that. And to me it was like a come clean moment. Midgley and Eric said basically you know that there is no systems thinking. It's all a bunch of disparate things that could can be used. I mean, every once in a while like a cause a loop diagram go be of eight or eight or something like that but actually cause a loop diagrams are relatively low impact on Donna. Donella Mills, Donna. Donella Meadows list list list of pressure points, ie that she's talks about how, you know, looking at goals and how they all in a relate is way up there on top looking at the potential impact, we're looking at how to, you know, just feedback loops and variables is way at the end of the list of 12 different things so in terms of in terms of that. Yeah, basically there is no unified description of systems thinking and as I was just referring to. And also there is no focus on the two priorities and system thinking and I've done a lot of research on it again that the two priorities are focused on goals and the impact of goals and vision, whereas feedback loops and would etc. That's done that a more micro level less impact has to be done but less impact so along those two parameters both the the integratedness of system thinking and the focus upon the two priority items. And that's wide open and I know systems thinking, at least from what I gathered is the everybody wants to jump into solving the world's big problems that's that's that's great. But in my mind and you can do anybody can challenge me on it that require systems thinking in order to do systems thinking we got to know what it had what to do. That's what this project is on what I could use I mean I made a lot of put a lot of effort in developing a start off as a stem teaching program for kids at a Catholic high school near where I'm at. And it's turned into something else. I'm making a lot of I've done video videos and what he calls PowerPoints based upon graphics and tie things together. What I could use is review people reviewing it in terms of, you know, I think that I, you know, something for clarity. And certainly that there's, I mean I could draw a road. I take simple models of the business system of a business world, and use that as a walkthrough example of what to do. But there's looking at things like goals and how they all interrelated if he in real business world you got huge models. And I can't do that. But so any feedback I could get in terms of, well, this I don't understand the point you're trying to make your Tony what do you, what do you mean by you got a deep, you know decompose the relationships as well as decompose the goals. It just just doesn't come through. I mean I think I'm being clear and I know anyways I think I'm being clear but I can use help. That's that's that I started on. What do you call that matter most matter most that's right. I started a site there where I'm posting some representative samples and just listening feedback on what what. How it comes across both in terms of yeah just feedback on how it comes across or I'm also open any other suggestions but that's, that's what I'm doing. Vincent and Mark I think they would still. Oh sorry was. Okay, I can I can default. I got the order wrong. No worries. I'll just go quickly. So I need to apologize I'm not as up to date on the matter most and kind of general chat that have been going on this week I've been a bit swamped, but we had a really good session on Tuesday, talking through how we kind of activate some of these ideas within OGM. I do think defining exactly what a project is and I think Pete Kaminsky is on a bit of this with the sovereign bracket of what a sovereign needs. I think that's a great starting point and then figuring out how the OGM can support projects like if we want to, if you want to figure out a unified way of systems thinking that would be great. Back to Ken's frame a bit. I do like the idea of mentioning what book we're reading at the moment so I'm reading the media from Gutenberg to Google to understand how we basically got to where we are at the moment. I'm trying to think as well I had a had a really good session with a group called Future Space. Yesterday, they're a group of futurist, highly non American, I would say so it's a really nice group to engage with. And I did mention OGM, and I did have just put out an open call for people if they want to come join some of our conversations. I think it would be good to start figuring out how we engage with groups like that I know Bentley put in another group in the matter most that could be good to reach out to. But yeah, I think it would be good to start moving that direction. I don't know if there's anything else I'm missing. Did a, did a deep dive into obsidian with Pete as well to figure out a bit more about our kind of GitHub and massive wiki setup. Yeah, I'll leave it that mark, I'll hand it over to you. You just remuted yourself. Yeah, I thought we were just commenting on Ken Homer I just wanted to plus one Bob Johansson and I posted a hour long. A Bob Johansson with Indian systems thinkers from India. And I think it's a really interesting way to spend an hour. And I, I, that was just a comment I will pull back and let other people intro. Okay, thanks Mark and I was just about to comment that me not sort of lightly shepherding situations seem to have fallen apart a little bit but you just put us back on track so I thank you for that. That's awesome and I had originally said can and I totally spaced on who I had an original queue after Ken you remember. I think the next after that. Yeah, that's right Ken Vince then Tony I think is what I said. So, I think this idea of the territory is fascinating and it actually intersects with a kind of project that I started yesterday. And I just wanted to screen share real quick because I don't know how best to describe this this yet. But if you could see my screen. I actually started basically drawing out. So, I had some inspiration to like sketch out a literal territory of the different kind of category systems in Trove so this is like, you know the entertainment hub. Here's like all the different like sustainability regenerative resource based economy, and then you have like technology entrepreneurship. And so I was like, okay, what, what if you could actually not just have one category system on a map but overlay lots of different category systems, all on one map. And so I started looking at all the different frameworks that exist that are all looking at the same world and the same really thing but they're just kind of categorizing things and focusing in different ways. So, we've gone on to donor economics, which has social and ecological categories. The bar remarks Hubbard's 12 sectors, which has a lot of overlap with the donor economics except it also has added in things about spirituality, art and culture, and also on like design which also are some things that I felt like are missing from the SDGs, which don't really talk about culture or media or the things that affect the way that we think about the world, as well as design. And then there's also these three sectors that solutionista woman named Trudy came up with that combines the SDGs into wellness, ethics and sustainability. And then there's the categories in trove, which are I'm calling the different like commons categories. And so there's like 30 of these, like from ranging from like mental health to like mutual aid. And then I found planetary boundaries, which is from Stockholm Institute, I believe. And everybody. Yeah. What's that rockstrom and everybody researching at Stockholm, which I think is part of the donut economics framing. Oh, is it okay because they look super similar. Yeah, I think they're connected. I think that donut is basically you drop you drop a donut on this kind of model and you talk about undershoot and overshoot. That's awesome. Yeah, that makes sense. The last one I found is the IFF world system model from Buckminster Fuller, but this one I also haven't explored too much. But yeah what I what I ended up trying to do. And I'll make this quick, but I basically started overlaying these systems on to each other. So, for example, you have the main like three sectors of like sustainability ethics and wellness. And then on top of that, I put basically the donut economic model. And then I added a few different sectors that I feel like are missing better in common these different areas. And then I overlaid on top of that the SDGs which are kind of category to be like very close in this territory so like, you know, the one about peace. Climate action is next to governance, no poverty and gender equality are next to arts media and culture quality education next education. And then the donut economics model sit on top of this. And then I also have the Maslow's hierarchy which fits is that little thing in the bottom. And then the trove categories sit on top of that. So just just a really cool visual way about how these categorization systems all interconnect. So that when people are trying to speak different different languages but talking about the same things you could draw the connections like through these different layers, and be able to translate ontologies and how they map with each other. Grace, you've got your hand up. Yeah, I can you show me that drawing from the beginning. I wanted to say something about that because that's a really good place for me to start introducing myself. The pencil one, that one. Right. So my name is Grace, I've been working on currency design. And if you look at all these objects here you'll notice that there's these rivers in between them. And none of those rivers are labeled. So what the heck is that like what's the water. And the water is, I'm going to name a few things, but mostly we don't talk about them, because we consider them the default or they're kind of invisible with it's like the fish is swimming in the water and it's like what water right. And so those rivers you can, you can not show that now I mean, but that's the idea right. The first one is money. Donut economics and all these things and all these systems we're looking at are inside of this idea that you trade things for equal value, and money is corrupted because it doesn't represent value. And the things that we value most air and relationships and clean water are devalued in monetary systems. So it's a miss. Miss labeling it's a tragic mislabeling at the time we created money as human beings. We didn't think we could fish all the fish in the sea so it did represent value at that time but the situation is reserved. So that's the first kind of part of the river. Other things that are in that river are things like the regulatory environment and I would put on top of that copyright and patent law, right, the idea that this is my private thing and I should own the land rather than being part of the land. And so these kinds of invisible consensus are when you think about the system thinks and it doesn't matter what you change and I would argue that the reason that you could switch any, if you took ahead of state from any country almost, and you switched it with the state from other country, you'd have the same bozo. And it's because the water is running through everybody and it doesn't matter what system of government, you have, and it doesn't matter what, you know, what else you do, because the water is all poisoned. And so those are the systems that I've been working on. I've been talking I started from the area of democracy I'm Israeli I live in Slovenia. Because I'm trying to live somewhere livable. And, and yeah, and so I've been working on these ideas sort of since the Arab Spring I was like oh well it's really great overthrow your dictatorship but you know I have nothing to recommend. I always keep coming back and I keep coming back to the rivers or the mortar it's like, we have such a tendency to look at the bricks and not the mortar and so that's what I'm trying to bring attention to and look at in my work because again when you're talking about systems thinking you're like how does this one affect that one it's like yeah but how does the air affect all of them. So that's me, that's my intro. Grace, thank you very much that's super cool. And triggered a lot of things in my head to German, try to avoid talking about right the second to see who also like to jump in. They're being there being an appropriate pause wait someone was speaking up. I was, I was appropriate length but I want to jump into say grace Thank you so much this is one of the more refreshing things I've heard about this story in a long time. The rivers are the flows. You know didn't do a meadows and others talk about stocks and flows but you're talking about flows in a more deeper and more transcendent sense and I love it. Thank you. And then the question for you I missed the beginning of your share what's the overarching heading for your collection. What are you, what are you after categorization systems around social impact. Great, got it. Yes, it works. importance of the rivers and the flows and the connections between and the relationships, and also the relationships that aren't there. So, yeah, how that gets visualized and labeled into the, you know, the territory the map will be really, really interesting. Yeah, it was it was also cool kind of seeing how there was just like what I learned from from that, that experience of doing the mapping was how there are different types of communities like some that use sg some that use like the 12 sectors that like focus on like very on different things. And the way that they focus on them is also different like the 12 sectors has like whole systems design right in the center. And sg's has the UN logo in the center. So there's a bit of a different right like feel there just with the visual aspect of it, versus having like a brand versus having a like a bowl. I'll stop there. Grace the other thing about your comments on the sketches that you know we were labeling the things and not the rivers but all of that is living on a landscape on a terrain on its apography. And that's rarely talked about in any modeling exercise. It's sort of you know it's it's the background that we're living in it's the it's the clearing that Heidegger talks about. And it's hard to talk about it because it's invisible. And not, you know, my friend Chauncey Bell says there are things that are not just unseen but unseeable. So, your comment to vote that for me is a missing element in just about every systems diagram mapping scheme I've ever seen. Um, Ken. Quickly, I just want to jump in and say, Jonathan hate wrote two books that I written one to but the two that I'm aware of ours a happiness hypothesis and the righteous mind, and he was interviewed and he said when I wrote the happiness hypothesis I was convinced that happiness came from within. I researched and wrote the righteous mind, I became convinced that happiness comes from between. And, you know, I often working within collective intelligence and groups. I've discovered you cannot walk into a room and say yo collective intelligence show yourself because it doesn't exist until you create relationships. So, your point grace about the flows in between, to me is that figure ground reversal of by focusing on relationships, which is context, we get a very different understanding of the maps that we're looking at. So I just wanted to throw that out. And thank you because Vincent and grace both I mean, this is really rich. I'm, I have to be like Jerry and sit on my hands now. I'll excited. Thanks, Ken, Mark. One of my favorite observations is that all models are wrong. They basically only take a subset of things, but they can be useful. Well, famous quote. I did want to throw in a couple of things now that there's been a circle around sort of water as a metaphor for things grace built on what you were doing. So going back to Vincent and his hand on map. It's like, there've been many attempts to draw landscapes of knowledge. There's like the maps of the the famous funny maps of the internet like here's here's the land of Facebook and here's the Gulf of despair, you know the bit bucket or whatever. And they're interesting, but they're all partial which is I think partly why the instinct to layer on multiple maps and to see what the relationships between the maps are and I think that inter maple communications or inter mappery analysis is really really interesting, and could yield a lot of a lot of good stuff. So there's a lot of different forms of water, several different things one is there's a thing called the San Quay diagram, and I'll type these into the matter most chat, but that's the diagrams basically. There was a guy named San Quay who tried to model the British economy using water. And so think of you know in in flows uses and then outflows and water preserves mass in some sense but shows you the flows. It was a nice, it was a nice way of modeling an economy, for example, and I don't know how far they've gone but there are now people who draw San Quay diagrams. It's one of you know there's a polar chart there's a whole series of ways of modeling dynamics and stuff like that. And this is a really interesting one, totally separately there's a guy named Victor Schauberger, who was an engineer helping get lumber off of hill sides. I think in Sweden or Scandinavia someplace, and he was building flumes basically you put water in the flume and you get the logs off the hill by by sluicing them downhill. But he started developing all these theories about water and what makes water alive, and water kind of needing chaos and never loving a straight line and there's a whole bunch of stuff about the dynamics of water. And then there's a couple other people about the nature of the weird nature of water and you know how it contain can contain emotions and all that that's another another thread. And then back to a piece of what you said about money grace. Arthur Brock has a really really nice video about Bessie the cow, and how money compacts value and he unpacks different kinds of value that Bessie represents Bessie was my favorite cow, something that's possible to represent in money. Bessie was the best milk producer in the herd Bessie, you know Bessie this Bessie that, but I'm really interested, very interested in the unpacking of value, so that we aren't minimizing and constraining everything to the exchange of dollars and that's kind of the libertarian point of view seems to be that if only everything had a price and everything had a perfect market we'd be fine because markets are the most efficient way to distribute resources, which to create bad fiction. They're good for some things and they're terrible at other things like commons really really bad at commons. So anyway, so those things in the conversation and Vincent you've checked in really nicely and I think Tony we were back to you to check in, and then sorry we'll go and grace was that your check in. Cool, so then we'll go Stacy mark. So Tony Stacy mark. Me Jerry I thought I. If you feel like that was your check and I think you sort of came in and so that'd be fine. Okay I'll just briefly restate systems thinking somebody mentioned that systems thinking it's not one thing, but as Derek Cabr points out it's not 2842 things. And that's kind of the things are currently that cannot continue. These, you know, students are saying hey I can't learn this stuff and it is no job than doing it and mishley's talking about it, unless we could come up with a unified approach to systems thinking that hooks out into other things, one unified core that hooks out into other aspects of system thinking that unless we could do that the whole career field is going to fall apart. I think they're both spot on a system systems thinking it's a system systems thinking map, perhaps. So let's go Stacy mark Gil, and I will still be here I just have to move locations. So following off of Anthony and thank you to Vincent and grace. One of the reasons I was excited in the chats that we were having emails when we started when you guys started talking about videos is because I saw that I saw the whole system of creating this of creating videos, as a possible model for this theory. And if I get this right. I wonder what would it look like if we were to replace money with attention and start thinking about how things might flow that way. Grace you look really confused that face. Jerry once asked Jerry once said, what would it have been like if Facebook would have really tried to give back to the person who was set up differently and that's something that I think of a lot, because Facebook did give a lot of people something, not necessarily the people in this room. Neil Davidson talks about. Yeah, I'm going on to another tangent right now because there is one thing that I wanted to state because it's usually not a lot of females in the room, and I thought this was important. I mentioned the whole sector of people that don't understand something. And it made me think of the difference between how parents get their kids to do something that's important. It seems that the male way is to scare people into doing something you better do this or this is going to happen. Whereas when I think about mothers in really dangerous situation but I'm talking about really dangerous mark. They didn't tell their kids. If you talk, we're going to be killed. They made it into a game. They, they took away the fear. And I think that I think that we really need to look at fear. We need to look at these systems and I know I'm all over the place but so just to bring it back. As far as what Grace and Vincent we're talking about. What I wonder is, what if we shifted Vincent that centerpiece, because I always say education, media and entertainment, all being the center hub, as a way to create attention as currency, and possibly be able to make things flow differently in a way that actually feeds people internally as well. I'm done because I know I know it's very abstract what I'm saying so that's why I'd be better in a smaller group. Well, this is a slightly larger than a really small group so we're right at that boundary kind of. Thank you for that Stacy. Did somebody want to mark please. Well, it's going to go next. Okay, and then I'll go after Gil. Mark, Tibo has his hand raised. Yeah, that's that's the beauty of having two marks. Say something first. Yeah, yeah, I was going to say something about fear. You're absolutely right. Stacy is something that we integrate so much into our processes, and yet they have a huge impact. The biggest that I see is on the kids today, how disconnected and depressed they are. I don't know if there is any study that I've measured how more depressed kids were all today compared to 40 or 50 years ago. But just a very fact of when you 1213 years old and climate change start into being integrated into the curriculum. That is huge. The impact is huge is as if we are telling them there is no future. How are these kids going to evolve in our society in 1020 years from now. We just, again, you know, doing things hoping for a result. And going back to this beautiful definition of insanity. Complete with that. Thanks Mark Gil, did you want to jump in. I think I'm up for check and so let me just say two comments and then offer that. Scotland is actually integrating ecological restoration into their school curriculum. So it's a different model of what to put into curriculum what kind of vision to plant young people's minds and a large part of their education is going to be outdoors. Kind of remarkable move there's a lot very interesting going on in Scotland, including public banking and some other things. I really appreciate Vincent Vincent's meta mapping exercise I geek out on that sort of thing a lot, but I realize that I'm also intrigued by the challenge of not only generating the most complete and comprehensive maps but also the most essential minimal and compact maps. And maybe this is down with systems thinking I don't know what that is. For me personally, life has taken a turn we've got some real estate challenges to deal with courtesy of the city of Berkeley. Well, so a lot of entrepreneurship efforts are going to crank down for a while, and I'm cranking up my effort to build out my speaking business as maybe a good flexible way to gather some coin while doing what I want to do. The most intriguing thing for me this week is yesterday had the next session of my monthly webinar and living between worlds and the focus was what I've come to call capital hyphen ism, which tries to suggest the fetishization of financial capital in the world we're in. And I'm in an exploration about what I'm calling the structural defects of capitalism not what we don't like about it not what we think is unfair about it not what we think is mean about it but what's in the structure of things that reform efforts like shareholder capitalism and conscious capitalism and so forth don't really address. It was a very rich conversation I thought from my perspective the chat was more full than I've ever seen a chat, at least in one of my webinars but maybe in any that I've seen. And there's a missing piece that we're chewing on I'd like to just drop it on you and see if people have suggestions maybe offline. The, the, the defects that I've identified or accumulation without limit extraction without reciprocity alienation without care, abstraction without ground and privatization without something and we don't know what that word is yet we have stewardship as a placeholder but that's it right. It's not parallel. And so I'm open to suggestions there or discussions with anybody who's interested in this to get at the essential the essentiality of the thing. And privatization is a tough one because in the, you know, in the history of the emergence of capitalism we see violence. You see privatization connected with violence from the enclosure acts to shadow slavery, if you will. And Becker I forget his first name has a fascinating book called the Empire of cotton, which charts the emergence of war capitalism as the nature of what we have lived and we have evolved as modern capitalism comes out of war and colonialism as fascinating and provocative book. Anyhow, I'm happy to talk with anybody more about that I'm open to suggestions about that missing word after the ellipsis fast work Jerry. And Gil, this is not right now. This is from when you posted it online. I was like, okay, so I put it in. And my computer is just beach balling on me which is too bad but I'm going to go to critiques of capital oops got to spell it right. You do critiques of capitalism is of course a thought and there's lots of stuff under critiques of capitalism and then Empire of cotton I've gotten I can show you who the author was but but anyway, this is what I do and what I didn't do yet, for example, is I didn't connect extraction without reciprocity up into extractive industries and sort of there's other people who are saying a similar sort of thing to this which is what I would, you know what I would do without reciprocity or time. It connects to extractive industry it also connects to braiding sweetgrass. Yes, and here's Sven Becker and Empire of cotton. And then I will go I will connect that to today's call because I started to see beach ball. My computer just doing too many things at one time. And then, braiding sweetgrass I'll connect in as well just because I like to figure out and apparently we've mentioned Empire of cotton on several different calls because I do that. All content mapped out. Yes, I use the brain for all these things it's really really really helpful and I'm thinking. My computer's got a spell it correctly also reading sweetgrass indigenous wisdom scientific knowledge and the teachings of plants. There we go, my computer's finally catching up. So, Pete once on one of these calls was note taking in hack MD, but he shared his screen behind him using, which is one of many sort of virtual cans. And that's because you could go pin Pete, and watch him do that in the background, you could also go to the document itself and cooperate with him which is kind of cool. I'll just stop sharing for a second so I can talk and see you guys. And I would love to sort of do the same thing with my brain except my computer melts when I try to use the virtual camp plus zoom plus all this other kind of stuff so kind of kind of stuck with like, throttled by the processor is a problem but but I'm actively note taking those calls as well as trying to moderate. And on this call in particular because it's a little bit more chaotic than usual, because we're shifting how how the locus of control works and all of that. I'm finding this. It's a it's like, I'm stalled by stalled by technology that you want to jump in. Yeah. On the word private. It has a very interesting origin it comes from the Latin pre vatis, which means to remove from the public, and the feeling that goes along with pre vatis saying something is sadness because it becomes a dead thing, because it's lost its community connections. Would you also share with would you also share with us the etymology of the word idiot. I don't know. Oh, sorry, the unique unique. The idiot is the selfish person who takes things away for themselves. So it's related I didn't I didn't mean to just stamp on what you were saying it's totally related. This is why the reciprocity and the alienation connect to the privatization. Yeah, and private in our world goes with property and property has the very interesting derivation that it comes from proper. It's what's proper to a man of rank to show his status in society. So it started as a social sign and became alienated became a thing you could buy and sell. And this is if I had more time I would do this but there are ancient concepts of reciprocity from lots of different communities so. Here's any which comes from the catcher and I'm out of traditions, along with. So here's fetch when I'm out of concepts of community, I use moon I these are all terms. Then you go to to, which is a concept from who put a boo boo means reciprocity in the Maori language, where they have a whole bunch of really interesting terms about stewardship and so forth. And I mean, most languages on earth will have a word for reciprocity. The thing is, these words that that I'm focusing on here are central to the cosmology of these different indigenous different ancient ancient ancient cultures. There's the word methyl, which I'm probably mispronouncing, which is about reciprocity and farming in Ireland I think in the sort of Celtic lands anyway I'll share back the screen and Vincent you wanted to jump in as well. Wait Jerry I had one more thing I wanted to say. Yes. And it has to do with, if we look at Vincent's drawings of concepts connected by pipes, and it's now pointed out nicely by grace that the pipes have a flow of something in them, which is water which could be multiple defined. What's missing in that description is that the concepts and the pipes are in a landscape, which is unnamed. And I think that that most attempts to do concept maps in a terrain, take the terrain is given and talk look at the concepts changing. And how we can develop a theory of landscapes actually the tone of the culture, so to speak, is a place we need to go. But there's a conversation right behind this conversation, which is about ownership versus stewardship and landscapes themselves. And what used to happen all around the world was that most ancient tribes managed the landscape they didn't divide the landscape into individual plots and say that's your cornfield this is where I raise my cows. And this is what the poem Mending Wall is actually sort of about by Robert Frost the famous poem which I think it's misinterpreted a whole bunch it's not about let's build more offensive. This is where the phrase good fences make good neighbors comes from, which is a which he's saying, we don't really need this fence this wall between us, your cows won't eat my pine cones, like we don't need this while why are we sitting here maintaining it every season. Right, and so, and so, if you went to Australia and North or South America you discovered that the locals had managed the landscape to live off it together because they understood very intelligently what they did with controlled burning, creating standing weirs, herding bison into a canyon and then feeding off them for a season, all kinds of really interesting things they did in the whole landscape together. Mark, Mark Tebow, and then Gil. Yes. So, very interestingly about how the landscape is being used and shaped. We see in the Amazon where there was a concentration of human beings, you'll find a higher frequency of plant species. And then suddenly you have a more less organized or could I say that more diversity of plants, and that usually would be the buffer zone separating one community or tried from another one. And that's how they will be using that space is talks to what you were saying Jerry so just want to share quickly something that I've been working on and that is on the right side you have all the pressure on indigenous people in the Amazon, or indigenous people in general like truly and on the left, what what they are so I would love to have this opportunity to go deeper in that with some of you if ever some, you know, I interested. All the benefits like for instance, you know, we know now, and I think I mentioned that the last time that indigenous people have a much higher diversity of microbiome. So, when we talk about biodiversity or diversity. It is shown in in very different aspects. One of the other thing that I've been working on is health and well being from an indigenous perspective. You know, this is this is a terrible first take at showing that I expressing that because it's so holistic that they do not break it down into categories. However, when I was thinking of communicating that to, you know, more Western audience. It was evident that it had to be done this way. So the individual on one space is spiritual aspect of the other space, the social and the environment. And if anyone would love to play with this with me, I'd love to. Thank you. And that was also my check in. And it occurs to me that we should set up a separate call and do what Vincent proposed only sort of back into it go go start from a different place and start from maybe the map you just showed about pressures on indigenous peoples and then layer on top of that are some of the changes and improvements and layers of mapping and value around that and kind of back into the directories and the catalogs and the force field analysis and other sorts of things around this issue. I think that could be a really interesting exploration for us. Maybe we find a time that works for a few people, bring a few people who are actually like, who are in the middle of that issue of pressure against indigenous communities and as our, as our, as our guests or clients for the call and then riff on that. I'd love to do that. I would love that. That'd be great. So we had Vincent, you want to jump in and Gil, you are going to check in before the top of the hour so Vincent then Gil. So yeah I wanted to respond to Gil's initial question about between privatization and steward what's maybe the word that fits there. And it occurred to me while you guys were talking. Vincent it doesn't need to fit between steward may not be the right word to contrast. And Vincent, your, your, your, your phones may not be plugged into your laptop because you're, we're hearing you from the laptop not that you're not your phone mic. You sound pretty, pretty faint. So while we're at it. I hope this is better. Sounds the same, but we can hear you. It's just that it's very. I'll just, I'll just speak up. You're fine. So basically what occurred to me is that the private sector. But in the economy there's everyone talks about public and private sector, private sector doesn't have to be responsible to the public. And so I think it's, I think the word that I would put there is responsibility but it's not just it's responsibility to who I think it's responsibility to the public or the whole right so like if you own a piece of land like you are responsible for making sure that land is better after you leave it. Right. So it's concept like that's, I don't know if maybe stewardship is the is a better word than yeah responsibility. But that was what I wanted to add to Gil's point. I like it. Thank you. Thank you. The narrative is a property of mind but I think it's not a problem of human individual human mind but I think it's a property of mind as a as a as a broader phenomenon at mind capital M or minds all of us an interaction because the narrative doesn't live in me. You know, I'm born into it. It's there and invisible and you know I sometimes notice it. I also commented for that we don't, you know, we don't explicitly map the landscape in our maps, and I didn't mean that as a suggestion I'm not sure that it should be mapped or that it can be mapped but we certainly need to be aware of, you know, the piece of paper that we're drawing the map on where the screen that we're constructing a map on which, which already in itself changes the map that I will build the different technology of mapping is going to affect how I map. The other comment is the Jerry the Robert Frost poem reminded me about the misappropriation of people's creativity and of prophecy and so forth here in the case of frost or Adam Smith who wouldn't recognize, or probably like what we do in his name these days and you've talked about pastor and the, you know, and the organism and the terrain. And just early in this conversation with the, the East India corporation story, misappropriating the word anarchy which, you know, means something very different in the mouth of anybody from Proudhon to non Chomsky. And I think is something that lives in the landscape of our conversations here. Because we talk a lot about coordination without the hierarchy of domination. And that's what I think we're questing after here. Yeah, exactly. Love that. And, and two cheers for anarchy by Scott is one of is a really great book and I agree with you entirely about anarchy, but it so happens that the anarchy is titled because of the context in India and so forth and I just wanted to say, I've got a thought in my brain misused and misquoted or misquoted and misused, which is Indian giver Maslow's hierarchy of needs my country writer wrong survival of the fittest. These, these terms are misused constantly. And so I have a thought for that which I will connect to today's. And so head one for anarchy as is chaos. Yeah. And so I will pass the mic to Mark Karanze you had your hand up a moment ago. There are some thinkers that do include the paper in the diagram. Certainly, Charles Sanders purse American philosopher probably the best American philosopher ever, who's woefully unknown. And there are people. I can't bring off the top of my head, but he wrote a book diagram, etology, which is an excellent but difficult book also takes a look at the epistemological ontological notions of the reality of mapping again, who kind of over your head. Continental philosophy at times but if anybody's interested. It's out there. As I say the truth is out there. And I, you know, I totally lost and screwed up my old list so I've got Ingrid Scott Bentley Michael let's try that. Oh hey guys so I've missed you the last few months. You know, I have a new job now and I'm actually waiting to get off I didn't even think I could stay this long. But what's interesting is I am keep lurking on seeing the emails going by and there is a concept I've been working on since before the pandemic, which also involves systems thinking time things together which are maybe not thought of in a holistic way, and putting it together in an actual physical presence so that would involve business agriculture and art and and and synthesizing them and having them amplify each other so it's so interesting that I found you anyway randomly and I've been lurking, and I keep seeing these nuggets coming out and they're almost like, they're telling me yes, keep going, you are thinking about you know things that the rest of the world is also coming to a realization of so I want to thank you for that and when I saw Vincent with his diagram. It really relates to some of the things I'm thinking about with this actual physical place to put these things together to start having people work together. So I'm really enthusiastic about staying with the group and even if I can't come I will definitely be lurking on your emails and and very interested also in regenerative culture so I saw some threads on that. I think it's Ken isn't who works in that right. It's actually close. Oh close right. Yep. So, you know, also I was wondering, are we going to visit or have I missed it that we have sort of a book list because you guys always mentioned these things and another thing is I think, who has the time to read all this stuff. I'm so impressed because honestly like I've got my 40 hours a week and then you know my other stuff and I love I would love to even do something that would be more of a. You know what do they call it when you go to college and your cliff notes kind of thing right. What are the nuggets because a lot of these writers are brilliant but then you have to weed through a lot of, let's just be honest crap to get the nuggets. So anyway, I can't throw it out there. Anyway, so that's Mark acting like a weed wacker right now. We need to weed through the nuggets. We did and that's okay perfect. Not at all. I hate to, but actually you there are so many things to notice in the context of reading and writing, and basically, it's great to possibly get back from the commentaries and go to the original notions. Boy, I do not. You know I make a joke about a reverse summarization engine, where you put in the summary and the artificial intelligence spits out the book. But, but really, gosh people take incredible pains of craft at writing, and basically to summarize is like a model, it's not everything. I mean, I'm a writer as well and I agree with you that you also have to look at the context and you have to go through all of that to get you to where you need to be to understand the concepts but on the other hand, you know, I hear these books and wow, amazing. But anyway, I agree and then I need the other side too but I'll leave it there because I might get called in but just to know that I am still lurking around and I'm looking through all your stuff. Anyway, thanks. Good to see all you guys again. So, I'm going to violate the protocol I started the beginning of the call and just jump right in because I have a lot of things I'd love to offer you before you have to drop from the call. I'm thrilled that you've been lurking and are in this call. Thank you for everything you just told us. If you'd like to set up a channel on matter most to hold the thought that to put to put the project you're working on in there so that we can know where to collaborate with you. We can help you do that it's really easy to start a channel. So I'd love to do that. There's an ogm member named David Bobville who's been on a journey similar to what you just described basically he created a world table exercise at one point, where people sat at a table shaped like the world, like a world map, and then talked about issues and did stuff like that he makes his art and technology. He's been sort of poking us to do stuff around cop 26 and Glasgow later this year. So there's a whole conversation there. Buckminster for famously did the world game. And we haven't talked much about the world game bucky's sort of a little bit in our conversation not that much but a friend of mine Dwayne Hendricks was at both world games he was at the original world game and then they did a recreation of it with modern technology because imagine you could do the world game where you actually had computers and projectors and could could like quickly do the data because it was all about like resources and and forces and all of that. Then. There's a thing called five minute universities which is how to distill the nuggets out of the books we read to know which books to go read. And mark we said, really rang a bell that I hadn't connected yet because I want more people to do five minute universities on the books they love on the things they love to do. But then this guy Dave Snowden who's like the originator of the Kinevin framework and a bunch of other stuff. Oh shoot my Michael you've got to go. Sorry, and it is nine. I'll finish with with Snowden and then go back to the floor, bummer. He has a very deep riff on how whenever you put summarization intermediation reinterpretation between raw data and anybody who has to make a decision you screw up the system. Like he's and he's really compelling on this. So he tries to create really powerful. He tries to create really powerful data collection tools and he has a thing called sense maker which is triangle. He tries to put their finger in a triangle between three different axes or questions, and it's a very data rich collection mechanism, and then he has a whole lot of other stuff that I don't know about how decision makers should tackle that data but but he hates summarization Usually we miss the actual point that was made or we misinterpret the data or whatever. So, so some way of going from shiny nugget back to the original text and reversing the path seems incredibly useful to me, because there's no way I'm going to make it through all the books in my kindle queue right now there is just like my life isn't going to be long enough unless somebody cracks life extension soon, my life won't be long enough to read all those books, and I need to know where to guide my attention. Right. And then, and then some like, when you read the originally like, well how they held that this person over there come up with that interpretation of this work, even at all. There's a visit. One of my favorite books is the Great Transformation by Polanyi, the head of the Mises society wrote a letter to his followers saying, and the letter basically says don't ever read this book he's a terrible person he's trying to do all these things. And the letter commits all of the sins that accuses Polanyi of committing none of which Polanyi is committing. It's really really interesting the letter is simply a way of telling his followers, not to read the book. The book calmly states a bunch of stuff it's like, wow, crap we did that. So anyway, I love the question on I would love to be of service to it in ways that OGM might be able to be. Let's set up a channel on matter most for it. And if you want to just reflect back before you have to bounce happy to hear what you what you think. Yeah, thank you guys. All cool. I have to pop off but yeah, I've just been secret about it because it's hard to present in a group of people I don't know to be honest and. But I'm so fascinated by everything and it's yeah I keep getting these messages so but thank you so much Jerry and I'll see you guys next time hopefully. Thank you and good awesome awesome awesome awesome. So now I've lost my cue and Michael and so by Michael had to drop off. We had Ingrid Scott Bentley Mike, so Scott Bentley and then whoever hasn't gone yet. Mark crowns on so Scott. Everyone. What to say. It's been months and months since I've been here. I've been busy with freelance work. I'm also a new newly certified trainer and systems thinking from cabera research lab which has been really interesting for me. I can't remember who I think it was Anthony's comment about unifying systems thinking. The work that there could bear has done is his fundamental thing was he noticed that all the previous work was on systems. So what are systems, how does systems work and when you realize is that it's all from a human perspective, because we're all thinking about it. So systems thinking. It's about the thinking we haven't talked about the thinking we've been talking about the systems. So now he brought thinking into it, and spent 20 years figuring out what thinking is and that's kind of the work that he had done. And the idea about the 5000 models of systems thinking. Well that's all stacked on to thinking. So systems as a modifier for the word thinking is like design thinking creative thinking empathetic thinking. So his focus was on thinking. And I think he nailed it. One of my first comments to him was that I've been trying to break it. And he said I've been trying to break it for 20 years. But I can't break the four pieces that I've come up with down into anything smaller. I can't take any of them out where it doesn't work anymore. So anyway, I think that's kind of fascinating but my angle from it with which the people of you who do know me. I'm interested in teaching it from people who don't know, have never even heard of any of this stuff on my interest is in kids, and in people who are like I don't have time for systems thinking. No, no, that's like, that's already too too much for them. So what I'm working on is systems thinking my, my card deck. I have my children in systems thinking explanatory visuals and graphics, always one page, always one graphic, whenever I can, and continuing to build 30 to 45 minute lunch and learns on single parts, such as here's the four simple patterns of every thought. So I come up with a simple systems mapping language and codecs for how to do that, which I would like to see as ubiquitous as outlining and everybody just knows how to do this. Because it's not, it's not complicated. And then using objects and environments to help you think. I got it from the very simple. How do I get Lego pieces into the world and help everyone understand how to put them together. And then I don't care what they do with it go, you know, go in every direction please. But if you try to take all of the different directions and come back down to what's at the root of all that. That's the part that I think that he's found it. And every time I use it, it's simpler than you think in the sense that a, you know, little binder clip is simpler than you think, but how can you use it. And by it. What do you mean the DSRP part of the middle. Okay. So just a, is that worth saying it's worth teaching us a bit. This is like a shiny nugget in the middle of what you found and it's really useful for us to hear. Okay, so here's the quick summary. And I put a link to it in the chat I put a link to my brain. Go ahead. And maybe sometime I'll give you my 15 minute built from the ground up new slideshow that I just delivered to a bunch of people. Um, so DSRP stands for distinctions systems relationships and perspectives. So what is a distinction distinction is an identity and an other, as soon as you decide what something is you've created a boundary between it and everything else. We cannot think about anything unless we we define what it is. And then we can talk about that boundary and make it bigger make it smaller make it more specific make it broader, but we have to start with. What is it, and that implies what it isn't second thing systems of nested parts and holes. Everything is a part of something else, and everything is a whole that contains parts. I mean we're still finding things bigger than we ever thought and things smaller than we ever thought so fundamentally, everything can be grouped into parts and holes and to Vincent's point. It's interesting how you can take the parts and combine them into different holes, which is, you know that's what those frameworks and models are. And the parts are changing it's just how you're rearranging them so be careful when we make a group of parts that we don't think that's the only way to group them. So we have distinctions boundary between what things are and what they aren't systems of nested parts and holes. So we have things that happen between those parts and holes I think grace was identifying that with the rivers. That's, that's all relationships there's cause effect. There's action and reaction. It's all the things that are happening between those distinct items within the parts between the holes. And then the last one is perspectives. So anything can be a perspective can be the point from which you look, or the thing you are looking at. And so by changing those around anytime you change the thing that's doing the looking, or the thing you are looking at, you change the distinctions, the parts, the holes and the relationships. And so fundamentally, those are the four, as far as has been discovered those are the four indivisible patterns of every thought. And they seem to map to reality as well in that every object is a part of a whole that has parts that is in relationship to other things that is distinct has a boundary between it and everything else, that can be seen as the point of view, the point or the view. And I think what's so remarkable to me about this is that you can debate until the end of time about how that builds into everything. But it does. And it doesn't matter as much what it builds into because that's the joy of it. That's the perspective of everyone and everything and how we've all assembled these in different ways. So that's, that's my summary that Scott that was super useful. That was a really nice example of a five minute university, although I don't think you ran five minutes. And it occurs to me that we maybe ought to set up every couple weeks. An OGM call for five minute universities, where we just make a queue of things exactly like what you just explained a bunch of different ones, and then we slice those up and publish those separately. And then in our, in our generative commons the thing we're trying to build together that has these ideas I think that'd be really useful broadly, you know. Cool, so we have Bentley and Mark. Everyone. And I think too. Sorry. I kind of noticed I had a cheat sheet up I was thinking of one the potential formats for this call is kind of the parking lot or something. Where, you know, as people are sharing, they can, you know, say I'd like to have this and discuss it. Things and then people can break out now. You don't want those breakouts all happening at the same time because that's one of the challenging things that you want to attend multiple ones, but that was just a thought, and then someone could be taking it down. And I'm sure there's more than I captured here and then of course Vincent went ahead and started making one of these breakouts to the chat channel so that should that could be fine but it's useful to have one place where we're storing the order of the updates so Jerry's kind of having to put them in the chat and losing them, or whoever is hosting and then this other thing about kind of breakout topics so maybe finding a way to store these things outside of the chat or duplicated in the chat or it's just a thought to make the calls go. Something to think about for the calls and then Anthony Anthony something I've been thinking about the universal. I'm sorry now I've forgotten the term you were using unified theory. I have the feeling that you're trying to take everything and I'm thinking that there might be some, some things of system theory that may should be excluded or left to advanced users. And so it almost like to think of another way to phrase that I could be wrong your intent maybe I am going to include everything and it has to include everything or it won't work but I bumped against I haven't figured out how to type that in so I didn't share that in the channel but just some food for thought we need to talk about it now we can talk more in the channel but but I am interested in that and then Vincent loved your map I thought maybe it'd be a fun little our project to throw that on a website where people can toggle on and off the players. I could probably do that in a few hours. And I don't think there's a no code tool for that or I'd say go do that. But that might be a fun little project that you know could post on my blog is showing what I can do and then you know you can share your ideas. And I don't know if we could put that into our, I don't think we. Yeah, I don't know if we could put that in. Massive whether it can handle that type of dynamic content but that'd be an interesting experiment, how do we, how do we expose that through our massive lucky. One of the things I was working on as a quick editor or Pete suggests maybe just a quick commenting system in massive wiki so it made it won't even display because it's just for someone to say hey I want to change this web page or make a suggestion how do I do this. Let's see if there's another like quick when we're a couple hours with the work would just take us one step closer to something useful. Anyway, so yeah that that's what's been going on in my brain. Bentley that's that's a lot of good stuff. I'm going to resist the urge to jump in immediately and say would anybody else like to comment on what Bentley just put in the room. There being nobody I will jump in. I'll give you a quick note on my theory I mean, it's a matter of degree not every not everything is going to fit into one, but the main concepts do fit together. What's missing now is there's there's absolutely no tie in for anything goals and causalities are two different worlds, and they was an excellent example of two things that absolutely need to be brought to be brought together because causality where we define the problem detail goals is where we need the first streamline the operations of free have some common sense of what's going on around here without mapping out goals and negotiating a standardization about what they are, or some agreement or what the goals are, you can't proceed it's ridiculous to try to do a causal loop diagram, it's going to be all wrong. No need to do a five minute university on systems thinking. That's that's that's that'd be a good start. Thanks Tony. So, Doug is this a comment on what that was just saying. Please go ahead. Sort of. I'm concerned. This is a meta comment I'm concerned that our concern for concepts and getting them right as a toolkit, never gets to the issues that need to be discussed. So the question like what do we do about the oil companies and climate change. It's not at all clear to me what the concept world brings to that question. That question is a narrative question and it's not so conceptual. So let me, let me jump in with it I was going to comment on Bentley's check in because it sort of ties back to what you just said Doug, and maybe it's about how we organize OGM and its efforts. And I'll start with something different, I make notes to myself in the chat so first feel and I were brainstorming how to how to experiment with these calls the Thursday calls one of the ideas was let's have a different host. Let's do alternating weeks or something like that. Another idea was to split the 90 minutes and half and do 45 minutes as plenary, and then have a place somewhere on massive or somewhere where people can say I would love to check in, you know, basically have a queue of people volunteering to check in for that 45 minutes, and then do breakouts for 45 minutes and have a similar place maybe the same page in the dashboard. That's like what are our breakout topics this week. And that you know that that way that we know that there's a bunch of people interested in these couple kinds of issues. And that sounds like a very reasonable experiment I think we should sort of try that because then, then we can all speak more and go deeper, you know, in the breakouts. I love plenary because I want everybody to sort of hear and see everybody doing stuff I just really love keeping people in plenary, but it's very inefficient for trying to get stuff done. Second thing is my own mental image about all this stuff systems thinking and all the different projects is that it's sort of like the world is a big hologram everything is deeply intertwangled. I believe that, and that every now and then there are these little crystallizing moments where ideas get simpler ideas can deal and line up in a way that's more easily communicated, or some idea runs rampant across the world and takes over and sort of freezes a bunch of parts of the hologram or something like that but but that a piece of OGM's work is helping crystallize the hologram, if that's not too weird language to put around it, but by weaving connections across layers of map or different kinds of map and mapping by making different tools work together by helping unify databases and analyses. And that helps people sort of bridge those gaps and make connections and use better tools to look at, you know, the problems that we're facing in the world. And then, and then, Doug, I think that we need to figure out how to take all this, like, primordial we're working on and make it practical and go try to influence legislators and go be helpful to the sunrise movement and go, go put things in front of people who can use them, so that we're not just sort of behind the curtain talking to ourselves about about interesting models. So I like that. What I'm interpreting as a piece of what you're saying is like we actually sort of need to get busy and use these things in the world. And the more we step away from that the more we're wasting our time in some sense. But but my general approach towards solving these things is work everywhere at once is that it's a hologram, and you've got to tip the system in lots of different places. So if somebody is passionate about organizing systems thinking and connecting it and connecting up the various models of systems thinking, well, let's let's find a place to nurture that conversation. And then let's figure out how to put that into the people building tools that people are creating policy papers, the people making movements, all that other kind of thing. You're muted. I appreciate Doug what you're asking for that we know that this that there are systems doing as well as systems thinking. But OGM may not be the place to organize legislative campaigns maybe the place that that increases the capacity and effectiveness of the folks who are running the campaigns to do those things. So we're involved in everything but we're not involved in everything. So there's a major OGM work principle which is like don't reinvent the wheel. So if anybody is doing something better than us or is already work at work on it let's let's help them achieve their goals. Like like let's let's put little rockets on their ankles so that they actually achieve what they're trying to do, and not the dysfunctional ones but the high functioning ones that are aiming toward the kinds of goals for looking for but but let's not replicate anything let's find people who are doing it and help them. Did that. Was I picking up generally where you're heading or was I misinterpreting. Well, I do feel misinterpreted here, because I'm not asking to go to practical activity. I'm asking to. I think the questions of what to do about climate change. They require a lot of deep reflection about society politics power and stuff like that it's not a good let's go to the practitioners and help them do what they're doing. I think we need clarity about the issues. And I think that clarity about the issues is not furthered very much by the concern for concepts. Let me respond to that I think that that's absolutely true. And that's an excellent point. I just want to clarify that at the same time like Jerry was saying we're doing all at once. We're working on our tools for concepts, but we recognize that that's only one piece of the puzzle. And all the other stuff that you mentioned is very important and probably is more important and should be done in an order, and we probably need kind of a meta discussion of saying, you know, how do we choose what tools to use when. But when we're suggesting these like these minute little tools we're not saying that these are, and I'll be all or this is the main way to do anything it's just an additional something in the back. Is that what they call the belt. The bat belt, the fat something it's everything's about something utility belt utility belt thank you I knew it was wrong. Anyways, yeah, but that's a really good point Doug we don't want to get over emphasis on building the tools or this little minute thing or even conceptualizing and step back to anybody else want on the question Doug is just raised Vincent please. Yeah. So thanks for raising the question Doug. I think it's always helpful to like reevaluate your frame and how much you're getting into the weeds in terms of like actually getting to the end goal. So, yeah, for me, I would also add on to what bet me said that having the right, like, understanding of the territory and the right categorization systems from a perspective of someone who's building a tool is a really helpful endeavor to be able to connect people to action to catalyze action and so one of the things that on Friday. We have like an open house session. I just posted a link to the event, designing the kind of like opportunity data type. So like, there's a lot of systems that do like needs and offers matching and there's also like, I'm thinking of opportunity as like the main way to connect people with action so an opportunity could be like hey I'm looking for help with this setting up this petition or I need a co founder to work on this project and the opportunities are like time sensitive and actionable and those are the hardest things to organize because they change very rapidly, and it's hard to do matching. And so that's why it's kind of in the last thing that we've designed. So how I'm seeing is like, basically projects communities and individuals could all have opportunities that are both personal and also align with the collective goals, and how do we make a way to be able to court use the internet and the digital tools we have to coordinate those opportunities to be able to like amplify our voices in a way that's not just spamming your opinion on a Facebook feed, but actually sharing something that people can take action over. And so that's kind of my frame has always been towards catalyzing action but the, the how to do that has been like categorizing information in a way that you can actually do that matchmaking almost automatically. Yeah, so this is my first time here so I don't know, but it seemed there was some level of enthusiasm about the comment that, you know, that talking about the models doesn't, or talking about. Yeah, talking about the models doesn't implement models, and that there's a, you know, like a bias towards talking and this has been one of the, there's a lot quite a number of groups that I've been in that have been like that but I haven't been in them for very well, just to warn you. Because, because we need to do experimentation and I think that the problems are quite obvious I don't think we need spent a lot of time defining them and I, and also the search for unity and you know having the right model, or having the right mission statement I don't have any patients for that either. I'm like you know people are dying and stuff let's just try to prevent a little bit of that be good you know. And so, I think as any organization and, and, and also my distaste for mission statements comes from my religion which I've known I know has survived for a long time against all odds. And, and the mission statement it's just like, I'm the one and only God and you shall have no other gods before me which isn't, it's not much of a mission statement. And so that's why I kind of had this taste for mission statements. But we've got laws and we've got narratives and we've got tools, and we know how to measure what's right wrong and, and I feel like measures and outcomes and I think Vincent was sort of pointing at that right, like knowing that we've actually caused people to be you know created and that people can take action. And then the next thing is seeing that they did take action, and then seeing whether the action is moving in the right direction and, and I mean that's really where my interest is right now and it's not that I don't sit around and create models I think we need to keep doing that but, and adjusting them but sort of as a function and it's like, there's a play right I do something and then I get a new model and I test something and then I get new information. So, yeah, that's great. Yeah, thank you. I have to wrap the call at the half unfortunately which is coming up quickly. A couple really quick things. One is, I think I think there are multiple maps on the territory that serve different purposes work for different people, I don't know about the one map that rules them all I think I am suspicious of the one map that rules them all because once you've defined what the framework is, what everybody in power does is they co op the terms in the map they dilute them they attack them they like, as soon as you say this is the this is the best framework or this is what it is. Then Doug, I'm one of way too many conversations I'm in is a bunch of scientists that who went to society who camp the Google science who camp. There was a sub conversation about the carbon sequestration effectiveness of old growth forests and surprisingly, a bunch of really smart people way beyond my pay grade were like, you know what, old trees are not sucking down a lot of carbon that's not their job in the world. And, you know, they were sort of raising an eyebrow about, hey, let's just go like save about the, and there's a difference between new growth trees and whatever, but there was this really complex and nuanced argument, merely about planting trees and plants for carbon and I'm like, I don't, and that's this week. Now in this world, which is in crisis and I'm like, I don't know that we get to crystallizing and understanding the whole picture before we go out and act on it properly. And in the interest of doing everything at once and acting everywhere at once. I'm thrilled about trying to crystallize the hologram, but I also need to get out and do something immediately. I need to get out of urgency to just go out and help people who need help, change people who have power, who have their hands on the levers, all of that kind of stuff with the best interpretation at hand today of that crystal vision. And, and we haven't done a great job in OGM of using our tools to share the vision and to crystallize it and to improve it. Several of us have put major works into the community to like hey here's my vision of what's going on, and we haven't spent the time to sort of deconstruct them and work on them and figure out how to do. So anyway, that's great. So, unfortunately, we need to wrap the call, but Mark Kronza go ahead. Very tiny thing. Go. In the CSC Agora I started a quest called tracking collaborative dynamics. These contribute. Sounds great would you put the link in our in the in the matter most chat that we're also trying to use for this. And we, I was really already done. You're awesome. Thank you. I got really strewn by this call but I love this call and for me like we were on two different chats and I couldn't keep track of both control of the call was moving all over the place and that was kind of funky. But I thank you all for being here very much this has been like generative and fun and we'll do this again next weekend maybe in a different slightly different format. Thanks all. Thanks guys. I wonder if this could stay on I'd love to talk with Vincent Scott. I'm not sure how. Oh, it's also recording so stopping recording would be. It does work but but the recording stays on and I don't know, since we're the last three people if we're able to turn that off. Who knows. I'm basically who cares I'm not going to talk about anything. I have to run in a few. Not a problem. You're where at Stanford. Are you at Stanford you said, myself. Yeah, I couldn't do what you said. Oh no no I so I live in Long Island, I did a fellowship program with Stanford with the D school called University Innovation Fellows. And I went to RPI. Yes, yes I already know that Vince I'd love to talk and zoom with you a good time. The difficult I'm working at the Internet Archive just kind of restarted the work and boy disability is about more than just missing work it's about missing lots of parts of life so kind of tough. And yeah there's lots to talk about I think. Yeah, so repeated request to give me a good time. Next, next Wednesday Tuesday or Wednesday. Right. If you want I could send you if you want to book a time on my calendar those two days are pretty open. If you want to pick a side will generate a meeting like course. I'm pleased you have my. How do you say email. First name dot last name at Gmail. Vincent L dot arena. Okay, Mark at Gmail. And I need to save this chat again. Save chat. Thanks and and Scott. Hi. I'm an artist, scientist, epistemologist and software developer. I work at the Internet Archive and for 37 years I've been writing down. My thoughts that I curated with the intent of seeing those thoughts again so I've got 2.7 million thoughts and 14 million links in between them. So, kind of a big, I don't like the term mind map I like kind of asynchronous mind mirror. Brain is a term that's been gaining some traction. Yeah, it's been co opted by. What's his name. I think it's good for, you know, a lot of commercialism that, you know, it's good that he makes a living. But I think second is, so I wanted to point out the Charles Sanders purses minimum vial on viable ontology of firstness secondness thirdness, or he says that any fourthness is basically a combination of firstness or the secondness and the thirdness on that type of thing not to put down the Cabrera I really am interest interested in looking at that. But also, just as a contrast I've been looking at a lot of four fold traditional analysis systems across cultures and across centuries from Aristotle to Leibniz to Leibniz. Let's see what's his name. Ernst Mach German Victorian. And they're totally interested in that kind of stuff. Yeah, the fundamental principle as I understand it and I'm no expert. I've discovered it about a year ago, and then have produced visuals about my own understanding which is what I do to help myself. Jill the concepts make them keep them top of mind make because if I can explain it visually then I feel like I get it. If I can't, then I'm not there yet. And so I make a lot of things to, to try to catalyze my own learning. I shared them with what I share them with the people whoever I make them for and around. They said that I had captured some things or express some things that they hadn't been able to express in the same way before. And I thought okay well I'm on to something and so over the last year I've, I've pursued this a bit but the thing that I find most interesting about the research is that it comes from a very scientific standpoint in the sense that he's just a no, no BS kind of guy. He's like if it doesn't work, I'm not using it. And, and he's just extremely practical and open to to poking at it. He really, he truly welcomes that whereas I've seen some people with their own mental models, because it's their mental model they, they have their own personality invested in it and you know I think that this is what I've experienced with my time with him. My, my certification was a month long, long thing so you know we spent, we spent a significant amount of time together, and I've communicated on the side and, and what I've just noticed is that he's authentic. He believes this is true. He is working very hard to break it and to explain it. He and his wife who's also a PhD at Cornell spent 10 years in elementary schools, teaching you to kids to see if it really was as simple universal fundamental as as they thought. And one of the things I heard was that if you can use this to make anything else. That's a sign that it's, it's at the root or close to the root. And he said I haven't been able to find anything else that can make, make this. And so it seems to be working and so he's had detractors guy named Gerald Midgley, who is a well known systems thinker I guess you know again I'm new to the field. He said, yeah, this is, he's just your model. And now here we are. Oh, wow, a couple years later maybe, and Midgley has now asked them to write. This is that chapter for his book, because he's, he's come around he said, I think you're right, I think this actually might be, you know, true in whatever sense that that is but it's. Anyway, so. So if I can respond. I study with Terry Deacon of UC Berkeley, who is a physical anthropologist. Anthropology is the study of the human and physically is like what atoms physics. What do you count to my hemispheres, the hemispheric the right brain, right brain rather than the continents of the earth, like the northern hemisphere southern hemisphere. I'm saying, physically, so you're talking about it's physical at all. Are you talking about the makeup of the physical structure. Yes, as well as basically, geographical or environment, you know what. The special conditions, ie, the formation of the earth, the origin of life, basically led to the ability to communicate. And looking at communication is real part of what we do is basically try to physicalize semiotics. So basically, we should be able to have communication as a scientific discipline. The things that come with that normativity, how we value things. And basically even how we feel. Yeah. So, I don't mentally believe it and I think we get hung up on the idea that if you somehow standardized that that you've limited everyone I say no because, because when you stack any individual on top of that, it diverges rapidly. I was at a Catholic mass where the sermon was about how basically, you know, describing the universe limits our concepts of that. Like, no, come on. It's not how it works, but it works for some people, you know, there's ways of interpreting. And my whole thing between, you know, science and religion was that well, religion exists in a scientific world. You know, it's all like, it's all part of the world. It's all it exists you cannot deny that that those concepts and models exist, because there are there are billions of people who practice that. It's like, okay, well, you can, you can write it off as something, but you have to write it off as something. It is it is a thing. And so, you know, I don't understand why there's such a it doesn't exist. It's like, well, yeah, it does. It exists. What is it? That's a question for the ages, but, but you can't deny that it doesn't exist because it does exist. There's also a conundrum with basically the notion of illusion illusion like reality is an illusion. Well, yes, we basically exist in a mind that what is it hallucinates to predict what its inputs are going to be and compare them with its predictions. It's our mental model. Oh, we can't, we cannot. Well, you know, the one of my favorite things I think you'll enjoy this was the idea of our reality is bounded in our physicality. And an interesting way of saying that is we can perceive about a tenth of a second, a little bit less to couple of years, maybe beyond that, you know, it's too complex to predict beyond a couple of years right and and shorter than that and we can't perceive it without other tools. And another interesting. We can predict, for example, the return of the comment Haley. Yes. But you understand, I do understand when you get to biological systems. You know, we study emergence levels of emergence. And so keep going. Yeah. And, well, and, all right. Oh, I know. And so the other one is that we can see a walkable distance. We can't see further than we could actually travel. There are ways of perceiving beyond that are our eyes, but generally speaking, it's so it's just interesting to me that that we don't really consider the physicality that we all share. We all have these. We're all bounded by by similar things. And that's familiar with the concept of own belt. Nope. It's a very important one. Um, you M WELP. Yeah, the world as it is experienced by a particular organism. Okay. So be have a different well then than dogs, which have a different belt than people. And there's Leven's belt there's there's basically a number of very powerful concepts that, you know, we have. We have limits. And we have different sensory. Availabilities, which expand through science, as you said, with our instruments. I had heard another way of describing it, which I'm fascinated with using physical objects to a thinking. I just, I mean, this is my project management tool. It's a series of index cards. I've even published how to make this, you know, is my second brain. Yeah, exactly. And I'm not, I'm not wedded to the second brain language. I just brought that up. Yeah, it's, it's, it's problematic for me. It's not a brain. A brain is something that grows from a tiny spec and differentiates into this massive kind of thing. It's not a designed system that we can basically specify. It's something organic that grows. It's just the wrong mapping of foundational knowledge of something that's wet into something that's dry, and it's just losing so much. So frightening anyway, please. And another way to think about our natural boundaries, if you will, for lack of a better word is when we look around a space. We see things we can grab. Because our scale, we notice things that at like plus two factor minus two factor from human scale. The notion of affordances as applied by Don Norman into the notion of what is it. What we can design with. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And it's really interesting. You don't see a spark plug surrounded by a car. Why, because that's that fits with, with this shape, you know, and, and it's just interesting and as we developed our conceptual abilities. As we, as we, what you talked about, which I'm assuming is a belt. Yes. Nice. I'm German. Totally, totally recommend. I think it's exceedingly important to bring that concept into not only, you know, our mutual vocabulary, but the vocabulary of, of school children. Yeah, it's an incredibly important concept. When we look at the work of the cabrera is that is, that is P that is perspective, and, and understanding that brings with it emotional intelligence and all kinds of good things. But what's interesting about their definition of perspective is you can also have perspective of inanimate objects. And so that, that, or ideas. What is the perspective, what from the perspective of the US government, what is X, you know, and, and it's, it's just an interesting thing because it's talking about organism, and I wonder that seems to be living things. Originally, but you can expand it. What are the sensory capacity capacities of a sensory swarm system connected to the UC Berkeley, you know, mainframe, where the sensors are all along a bounded geographical area, you know, it's, it's a, it's an abstract concept that is incredibly powerful. And there's these sets of foundational abstract concepts that I think are kind of the, the minimum viable science education that we need to sort of hopefully figure out to, to teach easily, for example, in the 17 hundreds, the calculus invented by Newton and Leibniz could only be understood by 1015 people across the world. And now it's taught in high school. So it's not only the ideas, it's the interface to the ideas that I try to look at as important to those ideas itself to themselves. Ideas are nothing without the ability to grasp them, as you said, the handles and Yeah, yeah. Well, and, and we've created digital versions of those objects. You know, and, and understanding that it's still the same thing that, you know, in a sense it's a, it's a, it's an object we can manipulate and interact with and, and, you know, it has to I'm familiar with the work of Brett Victor. No, I so highly recommend looking at at least one of Brett B R E T. Yeah, I think the ICT or his explorations, he's brilliant. He's fun. He's kind. And he's, he's actively attempting to get the world into modeling the real in, you know, and again all models are wrong. You've got to know where they start and stop. Sure. You, one of the one of my fundamental things that actually developed over the last year of being part of the OGM calls from time to time was a concept. I put it in the chat, because it's easy. It's, it's kind of a, you got to see it, how I write it. I don't see it in the chat or is in the OGM. It's just in our little chat, our little disposable zoom chat. Actually, I didn't see it there either. That's all right. I can, I can explain it. I have one plus one. Yes. Okay, so that is it. Okay. That's it. So the concept here for me. I'm working around is at the individual level. We are all way more like, we all think the same. And by think the same, I mean, use the same brain system. We use this. Well, this is an undifferentiated mass. All right. So the idea here is if we all think with DSRP, just as an example, let's just use that as, okay. If that is, if that happens to be true. And we all are taught that what it means is that at the individual level, you now have agency over understanding how you work, how you function. Then plus the understanding of one and one in this sense to me means every human is the same if you go up high enough. So if you go down low enough, you are all different. You are all one one plus one plus one plus one plus one. Interacting differently, agency, different interests, different perspectives. If you go up to the top. When we talk about when I talk about one there, I mean, humanity as a whole, we all share what we have in common, we all have our brain. We all have our, our ability to manipulate objects outside of ourselves our ability to communicate. And the problems to me are in between one and one. So at this level, it's like, yeah, we're all very similar in that we're all by ourselves, we all have our own processes that no one can see your field. And at this level, we're all similar. We are all alive we are trying to seek various things we have a brain we have we can manipulate we can communicate. And so the problems are when we get in the middle and everybody wants to put walls between it all and it's like, okay well those little ones add up into groups that we make. Multiple groups your members of multiple groups, and it's like that's where all the problems are in the center. And my goal, I work better at the, at the one level, which is like the like helping each individual. See their voice, see their hope, see their agency, have the tools, understand like you had said the minimum viable scientific, you know, understanding, you know how to tell a story, how to play a game, how to invent a game, how to think, how to build something design and build something you know these to me are the fundamental tools of my thinking skills for kids framework that I've developed is if I only had, you know, a week with with kids. What would I tell them. Well, I teach him DSRP because at the moment, I believe it's, it's, you know, this is a useful thing to have that can build into all sorts of other things. I would comment. Yeah, yeah. I'm sorry to interrupt your list. As a poet DSRP is a miserable kind of mellif mellifluousness. Yes, it ain't it ain't pretty. No, it's it's hard to it sounds academic. It sounds exclusionary because it's like, I mean to me, if I could make it one syllable for everything. You know, yeah, that's my goal is is most of the. So I have a it's, it's a framework of about 100 words, 100 individual words divided into subcategories, and it builds from thinking, which is the four DSRP plus mental models. Up to games, stories, and your life, the symphony of your life. And what I have to split what I had my my I spent 20 years working in the productivity world. And what I found was that was all in the middle. So how to get things done, how to make stuff, how to do strategic planning, how to, you know, that kind of thing. What I found was that the theory of thinking underpinned that for me and provided a base for that to sit on, and then games and stories on the top divided the, the why the the humanity the reason to do it the interpretation of our, our personal myths are our collective myths are, you know, the meaning, you know, because science doesn't tell you what to do. Just tells you what things are. And then you have to integrate that into your own value system. Okay, well, even sure that science tells you what things are. The best notion that I found about science is science is the limits of what we can say. And basically, we have to remember that, you know, it is a model it is a communication rather than a one to one correspondence with actual reality. Yeah. Absolutely. And, and again, we can say things better when we learn how to say them better, i.e. the calculus example, but also say the example of quantum physics, you know, used to be three people in the world and understood it. Now it's in every cell phone, every computer every chip because we're able to apply it by communicating how things are working in the practical world, based on what we've learned and sharing that communication. Anyway, I interrupted your list I'm so sorry. No, no, no, it's fine. It's fine. It's a suggestion. Yeah, that we sort of wrap things up and maybe retry, you know, half an hour is a good, but not a not a, you know, feel free to go on as long as you had intended to, but I make the suggestion. I like to wrap, at least my portion of this by saying that I, I put a graphic in the zoom chat that is the top level categories of the framework that I developed. And my, my goal is to create a deck of cards. It enables you to use these tools. And I would like to get it to, I've tested it on some kids, and they've said that it would be, they thought it would be useful for middle to high school kind of age. And my models tend to be 8020 in the sense that they're not perfect. But most of the people I've run into are not like you and me and a lot of the people on these calls, who have done their own self exploration, and who are willing to do the work of reading books and discovering. And so I'm more inclined to want to say, you know, these little things can help you and not go down the rabbit hole of, yeah, but it's missing this model and this model and that model and it's like, well, this one. I, I'm really happy with it. I think that it's, it gives you a lot of roots in a sense, or well, or platform gives you a lot of things to push on to say, I don't know what to do. Okay, well, let's try to look where do you think the problem is, is manifesting. Okay, well, it's a place to start. It's basically has a simple pattern that's followed by pretty much everyone, if they take a minimum amount of time to listen to about 20 or so sentences. It's certainly, I certainly appreciate that you keep on bringing it up and would like to find other people who have their own experiences and their own reflections on it. Feel free to spam me with anything you want in terms of email. I read an immense amount of things. And I know as I have, I see Vincent posted his mark dot Caron's at gmail.com. I mean I can post it. Yeah, that that's okay I'll just, I'll just send something up. I'm in San Francisco. You're at Northern Michigan. Does this look like Michigan or does this. Let's see. It was like, yeah, so a little bit like that points to New York. Yeah, thumb points in New York. Yeah, this is correct. Yeah. Okay, so I'm flopped I should. Anyway, so yeah, I live up here. Wow. What's absolutely there. This is up. This is up by Traverse City, Traverse City. Okay. So it's, it's kind of out in the woods. Vacation land but That's where we are. Well, I'm smack dab in the middle of the What is that inner sunset. It's a great neighborhood I've got God knows how many Chinese Japanese like multiple instances of Chinese Japanese and Indian within less than two blocks of my home. So it's, you know, there's, there's the richness of the city and it takes half an hour for me to walk to work at the Internet Archive through Golden Gate Park on almost no asphalt it's kind of dirt and the grass trails so, you know, by walking through a little mini redwood forest in the morning. It's not a bad thing. That's, that's not all bad. My, my, my primary primary diversity up here happens to be an income. It is pretty homogeneous as far as race goes but it's, it's billionaires living next to people who are really struggling. Yeah. Yeah. But my most of my other types of diverse interactions happen to just be through magic of zoom. Best thing of COVID for me was that it opened that world to me. Yeah. Well, thank you for staying on. There are many kinds of conversations and to, as I like, as I'm just learning how to say, multi model, multimodal. Yes. Excellent. Thank you, Mark. Thank you. Thank you. Good night or good morning or good afternoon. Take care. Bye-bye.