 Good morning. Is there a secret place for the link? It's always the same, and if you're in Mattermost, if you look up at the top of the window, right under the name of the channel, there's some descriptive stuff. You know what, it doesn't pop up until you put your cursor on it. Yeah. That's kind of a convention. A lot of times, if there's a standing call for a channel, somebody will finally put it up there. Got it. We can't hear you, Jerry. We finally returned back home. You still can't hear you, Jerry. It's good to be home. Yeah, that was very disruptive because it took us a few days to relocate. Check, check. Now you're here. Oh, good. I just had to replug the earphones. So much easier than rebooting. Indeed. I know. Hey Mike, hey Mike. Hey. Morning. I apologize in advance. I probably have to drop off in about 45 minutes. Sounds just fine. The vortex of life will absorb you into itself. More so this week than most. How do you feel about your China conversations, Mike? I was surprised at how specific and useful it was. Mostly because the Americans were quite blunt, but constructive. The Chinese had their very well-practiced talking points agreed upon by a committee of 20. But it was there were insights there and there were things that were not said that were as useful as the things that were said. But they're, they're desperate for dialogue. And the Americans explained to them that quantity of dialogue does not result in quantity quality of result. And so there was a little bit of a challenge put down to them. I think that's an appropriate seeking of the middle ground between a lot of talk without action and action without contemplation. This morning at 10, I was on a call with the Europeans. Who are having the EU funded project that has gotten academics funded for two years to figure out how to talk to more people about more things. And it's, I mean, I'm trying to figure out whether I should stay involved and urge them. Like we urge the Chinese to focus on a few actions rather than discussions about everything. I would support your input in that direction. Well, it's always, I mean, it's very hard when the people you're talking to are paid by the, they're paid by the meeting. At least they're not paid by the word. Well, I, I have a lot of respect. Well, that's true. That's true. Actually, I would wish we had a way to be paid by the idea. Oh, no. Similar but, but a little bit different. My favorite negotiation story is when, when the Vietnam War was starting to break and come starting to come to a close. I went to Geneva to negotiate a peace treaty of some sort. And the Americans led by Kissinger basically went to their hotel and checked in. The Vietnamese delegation rented a house. They leased a house. And then famously, the entire meeting proceeds to spend a year negotiating the size and shape of the table, and who's going to sit where a year. And it was the Vietnamese basically knowing that they could wait out the Americans, because they could hunker down and take, take the beatings sort of during the war, because they'd done it already. And knowing that the media and everything else was going to take down the Americans, and also figuring out power politics like who has power. And at the end there's a couple pictures you can see if there was a gigantic round table and then there were tables at either side which were separate. I'd forgotten what the other groups were at the square tables but, but there was this huge huge round table which is, which is where they ended up talking but, but, but I love negotiation stories. So, so some, so, so some days, your perceptions of what the other groups decision making model is can be really like kind of influence like what's happening, and how it all goes. And one of the learning experiences the Chinese was, maybe negotiated with the city about the design of our kitchens because I wanted to have open kitchens, which in China, which in Hong Kong, didn't exist. And the health inspector of the city there was finally getting really exasperated. And he was saying yeah that's, that's that will be very difficult. And I said yeah but we are here to solve problems difficulties good for us. And the side gave me the elbow. So by the time a Chinese tells you this would be difficult that means that snowball chance and there's just going to happen. Out of the most favorite stories of mine about miscommunication and idioms in particular is when Nixon went to Tokyo to meet with Prime Minister Tanaka back in the early 70s. And half of the Congress was on his back because the Japanese were selling below cost all these textiles. And so, first item on the agenda, Nixon goes, you know, you know you've got to stop this you can't be dumping your textiles destroying 10s of thousands of jobs all across South Carolina and North Carolina, you just can't do this, you know this is so important. And Tanaka said, Well, Mr. President, I guarantee you that we will do everything we can. And Nixon was like, great, that's exactly what I wanted to hear immediately into his second and third items. Oh dear, and only later was he informed that in Japanese, I will do everything I can means there's nothing I can do. But he's done it all. If I could but I can only do what I can and I can't. It's a great sentence actually. It's a great way to stand. It's a great way to stay in neutral but not like you're in like a forward year. We have a version of that which is people saying I'll do my best. Yeah. Which means what? It depends. Depends who you're exactly. Yeah, so much depends on framing. I'm wearing one of my favorite teachers today it has the character with the undo command on it. In movies though I think I'll see what I can do always means there's a solution but that's kind of shifty. It's going to be undercover yeah. Just to go with your t-shirt Jerry my very favorite gift from Kathleen and I have many of them is a pair of sterling silver stainless steel cuff links, one of which says ESC and the other one says DEL. Yeah. Love that. Do you flash them at people. Sometimes. But who's been wearing cuff links. What's the reason to dress up. I realized just recently that I don't think I have a tie left in my life, like like the ties got gifted and all are all gone so if I had to attend a funeral and wanted to look nice I'd have to go buy one. And I don't know what other event I would wear a tie to right now it's very weird. So why don't we start our, our chickens and we'll go. Eric, George Doug. I didn't expect starting. I know I thought I thought I would startle you by like throwing you in the middle of the ring right away. Okay, I think I think you're good for there. Okay. I think one question that came up for me is. There's so many ideas so many people that do their own stuff. The idea that Pete has kind of a connective role where he checks in with a lot of people that do technical work. For me it's, it's a difficult question one of them being. We all have these great ideas and we share them or not. And then some of them get developed. But it's how do we do that how do you even tackle that for me. I think one of the biggest problems is I want to maintain integrity with all the projects that I have. It's very difficult to explain all the levels of integrity to others. And then how, how do we bring it all together because when I hear about massive we oh that's close to what I want to do with them. I really do want to have a conversation already with Pete but there's something about integrity copyright, who gets the money. How do you create processes that generate fulfillment for everyone that are fair that that are equal and balanced like how do we do what kind of the deontology or something of platform development and doing that together. Is it, is it disorienting for you to be in this group because you find a lot of people who are on a similar journey to you who might be doing parts of what you're building or is it helpful to you and then I'll go to Mike and Pete. Both in the beginning it was really overwhelming because there's so many different thinking styles. So I decided also to take a break and I noticed that works like I can let it sink in and like, I can get used to what everybody's doing. That's one part of it. Otherwise, there's one one part of it is also like oh I don't want to miss the boat I don't want to be too late if somebody's already developing. Like, I want to be part of it. That's kind of a thing that pushes me forward even if it's not a good timing for me. And then also this kind of. I really want from my deepest integrity to align with others and that really requires time I think I'm learning to just take space for that and not push myself I think that's the best way to approach it. Thank you. Mike was your comment about Eric or from earlier. No I just wanted to get in the queue for you are noted. Let's let's go to Pete. Those are great observations are I think. So I do connect things I don't connect everything but I connect a lot of things. Partly that's because I connect the things that I'm personally working with and I'm working with a lot of things. There's a pattern that I've I've tried to start in the in the Federation of all the things that that we have kind of is is just to start a new project so it's kind of just do it. So with flotilla or massive wiki, it was just do it. It starts with me and maybe somebody else who's thought it was a good idea I talked to somebody and say hey is this a good idea or not and who else do you know. So, two or three people or something like that. We actually just start a matter most channel and call it something. And then continue to have our discussions there and you know hope to add a next check in or something like that talk about hey this is you know I'm doing this thing called massive wiki this is what it's like this is what it's not like. If anybody knows something else or a way that we should be connected let's let's connect up and do it, but a lot of it is just kind of, you know, just do it. The, the fairness and integrity thing I think there's a lot of rich discussion there and I, I'd like to actually the whole group, the whole Federation needs to talk about that more. But one of the things that the just do it and start with a very small separate group. By the way, another trick of starting a group is giving it a good name. So good names are distinctive and they're also meaningful so open global mind is meaningful collective sense commons is meaningful. So you give it a good name. But when you start a small group like that, it's, it's got its own fairness rules. One of the things that I've noticed in in previous kind of incarnations of this cloudy fuzzy, you know, let's all have a group together thing is that when you try to make it expressly a, a component of a, a subsidiary of a large group, it's hard to get governance going and it's hard to make decisions that it's hard to, to, you know, it, it's easy to feel like for other people in the larger group to feel like hey I should have been consulted on that why didn't you guys talk to me when you started a group about blah blah blah. But if I start something very small and focused, like flotilla, or like massive wiki, I can say, come join my group if you want. You don't have to bet words sovereign we're independent and we're making decisions about, you know, flotilla makes its decisions about what it wants to do by itself. It doesn't have to consult with a bunch of people that it's a subsidiary of it's by itself. So I think that's, there's something to that pattern where you want lots of small focus groups that are self sovereign. And then we have to get better at federating together how do we make decisions together how do we make commitments to each other together. But that that focus let's us do and take you know it helps a lot with integrity and fairness and things like that. Because then it what it what it does is it means that you have to build API is connective agreements to each other explicitly to actually get anything done to together with another federation right so flotilla and catalyst have a good sense of how they work together and CSC and OGM and Kiko lab more or less have a good. We have a lot of unspoken roles we'd have and started writing these down but CSC and OGM and Kiko lab all have kind of mutual agreements with each other, but OGM doesn't have governance over CSC and Kiko lab doesn't have governance over CSC and vice versa CSC can't tell OGM or Kiko lab what to do. We can kind of, you know recommend to each other as sovereigns. That's a good thinking material for me. And in, I mean, one of the big questions I think that's open right now is what is, and it goes under many names but what is the new civilizational operating system. What is the new stack. How do we govern ourselves. What business model choices should we make all those kinds of things and, and kind of at every level, like, is it is a free market capitalism or social socialism and communism, which is a false binary. And then, and then, should, should I become an LLC, a multistaker holder co op, some other kind of co op of this or that that that sort of live and then, and then deeper into any organization, how do we reward value how do we acknowledge who did work how do we coordinate among the activities. And in the meantime, decentralization is happening everywhere and sort of individual autonomy seems to be really nice way to build stuff. So this stack, I don't, I don't, there's a bunch of people working on each level of the stack, lots of different groups and teams. One of the exercises I would love for us to do as a group and I'll start up a page on massive wiki for this and see what we can do and invite people. But I'd love for us to sort of assess and map some of this and some of the efforts so that for ourselves, we can pick our way through better. And for anybody else in the world looking at these questions, they might be able to help us complete the set and ask, ask the right questions going in. And Eric, I think you're trying to sort of chew and digest the whole stack. I have this feeling that you're kind of tackling like as much of this, you have a very, you have a very big appetite for world problems. And you're, you're unlikely to be able to solve and write down all of the levels of the stack. But if we can sort of connect you and harness you with other people who are who are on the same mission. I think you'll be, you might just find a really satisfying way to externalize the stuff that's in your head and feed models, this being only one of them, but models of how this might work. Does that make sense. There's a lot of things I could say to that but I want to keep time a bit compact so yeah. Thanks. Three, thanks. So let's go George Doug Judy Mike. Okay. It's been a wild, wild, wild week. You're on fire, George. Oh my God, I've been hanging out on Clubhouse spaces. And angle, which is a German one. That's got way better features than anybody, but it's small. The, in touch with the heads of almost all of them. And it's this audio only they're calling it social audio. Audio or lags. Live audio groups is it's just becoming, you know, everybody's. I used to argue that audio groups are better than video groups for most things, especially focus groups. Sold millions of dollars worth of audio focus audio only focus groups. And could never really convince people. And now with zoom fatigue. I can convince them into words by just using the word zoom fatigue. And how much more for some things I think some of you took me to be saying all things. Last week and I apologize for that lack of clarity on my part. But for most things, including friendly discussions. Audio is actually superior and people are coming to openly discuss that, which is just amazing to me spent 30 years trying to convince people. And now all of a sudden the pandemic is forced acceleration of these, these media. And anyway, people are really exploring what we what you can do with it. There is just a gigantic opportunity to contribute. They really don't know how to run discussions most of with a few really, really spectacular exceptions. They need to, they need to move from from hosting. Most of someone who arranges the chairs and serves drinks to moderating, which is someone who dams things down. Mod causes moderation. To facilitation. And most people are not doing facilitation. And they're, they're looking at their, they're literally dragging me in. To do facilitation seminars and sessions and whatever, urging me to do my own. I did a few of them myself. Every time I do it, I get 30 or 15 new followers on Twitter. It's crazy. It's, there was a real thirst for bringing back the art of conversation. Everybody here is old enough to, to remember that they used to be the art of conversation. And it's gone, it's gone, it is argument it's insult it's just have to go over to political Twitter, or various political zoom calls to see a bunch of bunch of fifth grade using a bunch of fifth graders, basically, you know, they're using the tools we used in fifth grade. And, and most of us learned more graceful tools and more graceful ways to disagree. The younger people don't have that anymore. You were trying to, you wanted to react to what I was saying. I'm sorry, I can't resist being moderate. Sorry. All right. And there was a bit, and there was a visual cue, which is impossible to do on Clubhouse. I don't know about spaces. So, yes, yes and no way. Let me push back on that for a second. Sure. What happens is everybody says that. Let me let me add my question. And let's not get into comparative. Let me add my question. Sure, your context on this. You asserted very clearly that you find some real advantages to audio only versus audio and video conversations if you could you very succinctly summarize why you have that view. Two words, psychological safety. Okay. My question is when I would do the focus group, I've done hundreds of focus groups face to face and thousands of focus groups on telephone. Yep. And the same some sometimes the same group, literally the same kinds of people, sometimes on the same subject with different people. Often it was a client's choice you want to do face to face or telephone. They almost invariably chose face to face. But what happens is you look what you lose in facial expressions and body language, you gain in the openness due to the psychological safety. And what happens to your point about waving your hand and my, my engaging you is that I would be able as an audio moderator. I would be able to see you probably go, or you probably clear your throat prior to wanting to talk, or you would just jump in to train people to just jump in. Once person's made his point is just fine to just jump in and on the end of his sentence or whatever. It's very interactive. It becomes almost rude, but very, very productive. And I've done a lot of comparisons of transcripts of face to face to face versus telephone audio only, and found that the people like they think when asked that they had a better discussion face to face. And when you have independent people. Rate it. They rate the ones that were audio only as better discussion. So I don't want to monopolize it, but I'd be happy to you, you're sitting there with your mouth open. And I'd like to not repeat last week's mistake on this, which was 20 minutes into the call Kevin Jones said, like I almost left the call because we got into a facilitators, facilitators missing match. And I, and I love the depth of this conversation and would love to take it into one of our channels on matter most or, or discourse, because I think it's, this is like meat and potatoes for some of us. The succinct expression of why something works in what conditions and what situations is a really useful navigating guide for anybody coming in trying to choose tools. May I take 15 seconds to propose something. I propose that we have as a sub zoom zoom call for people who are interested in this, and that we experiment with turning off our videos, having having a discussion and turning the videos back on again. And having continuing the discussion, and often on and often, and, and, and just experiment with it so see what happens. That sounds great. Happy to do that. Cool. So let's go. What was that you, Doug Judy Mike. Well, I find myself. Not wanting to speak very much this morning. But the reason is interesting. I'm continually in situations where I don't know how the group should talk about climate change or not talk about it. And not talking about it always feels weird because it's such a looming presence in our lives and usually in the background of the group that I'm working with. I'm so struck by the fact that people mostly think that time will still solve the problem with technologies. Something will happen. I'm much more struck by the fact that the social reaction to the impending problem of climate change is going to happen before the problems themselves. And nobody's hardly talking about that at all. I just find the psychology of it so striking. By virtue of the way that I am living right now with clients and discussions. Climate change is just on the forefront of my mind all the time and I don't know how to moderate that into the conversation. The conversation veers off into tactical issues around the work that people are already doing. Doug, I'm sure you're aware of hyper objects. Yes. And I part of the problem I think and I'm putting a link in the chat about hyper objects it's a Timothy Morton's kind of concept and he wrote a book titled hyper objects. Climate change is a hyper object hyper objects are problems that are too big to understand too big to comprehend too big to wrap your hands around. And I think that's one of the problems is that is that it's a crucial large issue. It could dominate every conversation and then what happens to everything else and so forth. And so, I'm wondering, I'm wondering if you factored sort of the hyper object nature of this topic into your concerns the concerns you're expressed right now and what that, how that works for you. Well, I think it's certainly part of the psychology of talking about climate change is that it's too big to fit into a conversation. There are parts that are smaller that do fit in and still don't get traction. For example, we're supposed, we have to cut co2. The proposals are that we cut it by some percentage by 2035. There's no proposals on how to cut it next week. And there we're stuck. And then I'll go to Pete and Gil on the second my my my own, my own response to your question Doug is that my take on this is that trust is my lever my personal way to influence this because we can't make any motion on these kinds of questions because we don't trust each other and we're in a political lockup. And if we can come back into trust and figure out how to make collective decisions together and so GM. I actually make progress on climate change and I would like to help all the brilliant groups that are making progress whether it's climate change or discourse and debate or whatever else it might be make progress somehow through through our activities here so I feel like I feel like in doing what GM is doing we're sort of tipping to help climate change as well, although it may seem really indirect. So let's go Pete and Gil. Yeah, that's a wonderful observation. And, and I feel like I'm going to take the conversation away from climate right away, which I don't mean to do lightly. I understand that climate change is one of the biggest problems that we have and I guess my strategy for dealing. So I guess I, I also live, like you said that I constant, I'm constantly aware of climate change I'm constantly thinking of climate change. How do I go into a conversation space and talk about you know something else, when we should all be talking about how we're going to reduce carbon tomorrow. Yes, and, and I mean that completely collaboratively yes, and you know, racial justice. The concept of, of AI, AGI is very real for me. That's something that, you know, so I know how to moderate most of these conversations climate change I don't talk about it, AGI I don't talk about it. Race, I kind of do talk about it except I'm handicapped because I'm white and male and I, and you know my whole race sucks. I came up with, I hope I didn't distract myself away from something that I came to the realization to have had a wonderful conversation conversation yesterday with Parmjit. We talked about a whole bunch of stuff, mostly about me doing genealogy something completely personal which was so totally fun. And the important thing that we talked about was the, the insidious way that wealth concentration has taken over our lives. So there's an interesting thing that everybody kind of knows that there's the man and, you know, all of us are somewhere lower on the totem pole then you know the, you know, the Rupert Murdochs and Bill Gates of the world. And it's like, yeah, that sucks for me. I guess I'm, you know, comparatively poor person, but at least I'm richer than, you know, the rest of everybody else, you know, that's kind of a way that we live with that. In, in talking with Parmjit, one of the things I realized is this is not just a like kind of this suck situation. I had this flash this morning, it's like climate change is a thing that we don't talk about and finally with climate change we've started to lever into talking about it. And wealth concentration, the way it works, it's, it's like a virus or a cancer upon humanity. The way it works is that when some, you know, somebody tips into having a little bit, you know, the Dutch each in East India company back 400 years ago or whatever, somebody tips into a little bit more concentration of power and wealth. And then that concentration of power and wealth is able to leverage itself into having more concentrations of power and wealth. And so that is a runaway process. I, you know, I at some point I said, hey, Parmjit, you know, at least you and I were doing okay in life, you know, we have a comfortable home we have, we can eat nice food and we can actually have some leisure time to talk about cool stuff, right. And she's like, well, yeah, except that my kids, you know, like you and I, Pete, you know, we have a pretty nice house, but my kids are going to have a less nice house and their kids are going to have a less nice house, because wealth concentration has started this runaway process where the rich keep getting richer and want to keep getting richer. And there's a, there's a process there that we haven't, I thought of it as name and shame shame is not the right thing, but the problem with wealth concentration in a runaway sense is, I think, as big as climate change and actually it's one of the climate change. The climate change, the people who drive the carbon processes are the people who figured out how to concentrate wealth and power and they want to keep it that way and they really don't care if, if carbon goes haywire because they've got all the wealth and power and that's what they want. And it's not that that's an individual thing, that wealth and power concentration thing, we think of it as happening to individuals, but we're individuals, it's actually a social process, it's something that has taken over humanity. It's not, it's not that Rupert Murdoch is decided, you know, he woke up one day when he was 20 years old and he said, I'm going to take over the world and screw everybody else I'm going to make the world a horrible place for everybody else. It's the social pressure of picking, you know, letting somebody like Rupert Murdoch be in a position of power that that is the problem. So, so to come back to Doug's question. It's a really interesting question. I think, you know, I have like six of those that I live with climate change is one of them. I, you know, for climate change in particular, I live with this, like, okay, well, I guess the world is going to be a completely different place in in 50 years or 100 years and I don't even know how my grandkids are going to survive in it. The same way that I don't know how they're going to survive in a world with with runaway AGI or runaway. You know, we might end up, I saw a report recently where it's, you know, it's obvious. Oh, the way that the world responded to COVID was we ended up all over the place but we're kind of ending up in these little conclaves of healthy people and, and big barriers to keep, you know, the sick and poor people out, you know, so maybe that's where we're going and maybe that's the world my, my grandkids live in. I don't like that. So the way that I deal with all of that is every day I wake up and I try to be productive and the way I try to be, and the way that I know that I can be most productive to help the world is to help people communicate and collaborate and coordinate. So, you know, so massive wiki the reason I'm doing massive wiki is probably because it's fun for me but partly because I want more people to have more knowledge and share more knowledge. The reason I'm doing OGM or the big Federation that we're in. It's because I want more people working together solving problems. So I picked, you know, something that is changing the world and can change the world in a better way. It happens to be meta thing or meta meta that literally I'm working on climate change every day as I work on massive wiki as I work on federating OGM as I, you know, etc etc. Pete, thanks. Let's go to Gil and then class and then I want to change the queue a little bit. I'll go to Mike first so we catch him before you have to drop off the call. Go ahead. Yeah, just briefly, I have more to say about this when it's my turn to share but the Doug's point about what are we doing today. You know, no one's, I think you said Doug that no one's talking about that and that's true in the big in the policy dialogues. But Saul Griffith local MacArthur fellow did a talk a couple years ago where he got up and said, you know, everyone's saying we have 10 years left to solve this he said no actually we don't, we have 10 seconds. And his point was what we need to be doing is everything that we know how to do impeccably right now, not like phase in over 10 or 20 years, but make these moves now and the question of how we move into instant action in a policy environment that is deliberative and slow partly by design is a huge challenge here. You know people here 10 here we have to solve this by 2030 and they think we can start doing things in 2028. And that'll be good enough. And in fact there's a lot of stuff that is ready to hand that is economical today technologically today solid today. And the question is how do you move both, not both a society, but also individuals to action at speed. And it's about that to come. And it's not like there aren't people on deck like Greta Thunberg who are saying the house is on fire you need to mobilize like this was World War two like like that's a very loud voice in our sphere. Yeah, just really briefly. I mean I echo what duck is saying. We are in a perfect storm. And Pete moist a number of issues that express this perfect storm. But within the perfect storm and I look at this really like a World War two type mobilization that mobilization took place across the entire in every sector of the industry was engaged in it. It was all towards a common outcome. I mean you could have been an engineer in an automotive plant and converted it to produce tanks and airplanes. And no one had to tell you in detail what to do people became self motivated self guided self directed. And I think that sense of urgency is still missing. That's I think what duck observations also is we're talking about tools and processes and so on we're not talking about how to apply them. Yeah, famously when World War two when the US finally steps into World War two, a lot of manufacturers show up at Roosevelt's desktop. And they say they say we have made plans we can be making tanks within like six months, nine months, nine months and Roosevelt says you'll be making tanks next month. That's right. So yeah, I've been telling that story for years and I haven't been able to find a documented source for it do you have one. I do not know I think we might be able to fact check that as we go through this call. I appreciate that because I think that's an important story to fact check. So let's go Mike Judy Pete. Thank you very much Jerry boy I needed this, this week, and particularly Pete the comments you just made on the big issues and the hyper objects I guess Jerry. I feel like I've been bombarded by hyper objects this week and trying to figure out, you know where is the thing that I can do the most to push back and to make some progress. I work at a place with the Carnegie Endowment where the currency is papers, you know, often 30 page papers. My specialty is more tweets, and doing what Jerry does which is connecting people with different ideas together and getting them to tackle something in a new way. And so I'm in a little bit of a tension point and I'm actually scaling back part of my job and rebuying hiring somebody else to replace that part of my job, the part that's focused more on the writing the big papers. But I do think I have to do more on finding the case studies that can really change the way people think about a problem. And my, my big hyper objects the ones that are bombarding me to this week are cybersecurity data governance. As you mentioned Pete machine learning big data artificial intelligence. I'm less concerned about artificial general intelligence I just want to get the first stage of this sort of thing right. And then the other big object is disinformation we have a partnership, a Carnegie partnership for cooperation for partnership for countering influence operations. But anyway, I keep thinking there's some, you know, some idea some big change in the way we look at these things that will will actually move us forward but I'm coming to conclude that no actually you just have to do those little case studies you just have to build the bricks and go The other thing personally I'm feeling bombarded by is corruption and and all the distortions of our economy and our governments caused by by corruption, and you nailed it it's power being purchased by by billionaires. And I'll share with you a book by a friend. It's a coloring book about Jerry Mandarin in America. It's a friend and her daughter did this. Exactly. You can you can teach your kids how to Jerry Mander from an early age, but maybe it'll change the dynamics for this next election cycle. The other book I'd recommend to you if you haven't seen it it's called the politics industry. And it's by Catherine Gill and Michael Porter, the business guru. The title is how political innovation can create partisan gridlock and save our democracy. So I'm trying to find these ideas that I can help promulgate and trying to get to the right people who can push them into new industries or new new communities. But it's, it's a frustrating thing when you only have 24 hours a day. And so, thank you very much Pete for for kind of getting us to set some priorities and go from there. That's true. It's always, it's always there's always something interesting and I always walk away with five new articles and three, three more books to read. I, speaking of which I posted a couple articles on the data governance issues that we're struggling with. Yeah, thank you. We haven't a whole nother topic of discussion on that is how powerful people and governments are trying to. So I'll pull all the information together and then restrict who gets to use it. Put the other books you mentioned in the chat. They're in matter most scroll if you scroll up for this session Judy you'll see you'll find them. Oh the book sorry I just put one of them in and Mike can you put the other one as well. I'll put the other one in the politics industry one. Yeah. And these the cycle of crises and I put a link to my brain for like we're in the middle of five crises and you can change five to six to seven to whatever. But the cycle of crisis is sort of like an Eroboros, which is the snake eating its tail. And it's like, well, our problem is short term is in short term thinking nobody's thinking about seven generations our problem is ownership like we've created an ownership model where we're sucking away value to a few people our problem is trust like the process. And in fact, I think all of these are correct. And figuring out how to dislodge the log jam that's in between them all might tip us pretty swiftly into a common unified way of seeing how to fix things. And if everybody keeps doing the work we might actually reach that tipping point that's my naive systems thinking perspective on this whole thing. Go ahead Doug. Well, just just real quick. The real reason I'm feeling bombarded this week is I made the mistake yesterday of spending an hour and a half listening to the Senate Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats. Oh man. This is the first time the heads of all of the top, the top five intelligence community officers came together to brief the Senate. First time they've done it in two years. Incredibly scary. Not only the cybersecurity and the climate change and the disinformation issues, but also reassuring to hear two or three of the smartest, best, sanest, most moral people. You could imagine in these jobs. So it was, it was scary but comforting at the same time. And right today they're the House Intelligence Committee is meeting. I love to go into the secret hearing that they do next but it's worth watching particularly just watch the first two senators and then the responses. It gets into a lot of detail later but there's a good sense of, okay, these people know what the world is like, and they have a clue and how to get some action to make sure these threats don't turn into catastrophes. And if you can post a link to that. Okay, in most conversations about climate change I think there's the assumption that we, there's some way to get it right and save everybody. The unspoken is that there's going to have to be losses, losses of jobs, losses of habitat, and probably with migrations losses of life. So people just don't willing to go talk about that. Yeah, that's an awkward pause but the, the forecast really is that we are looking at tens of millions of people, which are already on the, on the move, right. I mean just think about that the millions displaced from Syria, who have been living in camps children have never lived anywhere other than in a refugee camp. So people, there's no way for them to repeat be repatriated. The political scenario is not their climate change has ravaged Syria. And if we wanted to do anything constructive for Syria, we would send in agricultural support systems to allow them to regenerate their soil and feed themselves. And the most logical approach to take not just in Syria but also in South America and so on. So, so by not having this focus on the immediacy of this threat of displacing tens of millions of people for lack of food lack of lack of access to basic life sustaining resources. We are we're amplifying a threat that is that is quite imminent. And then Mark. Yeah. Doug I'm struck by what you said and I'm struck by how we all responded to it with being unable to speak you said we're unable to speak about it we weren't able to speak about it. So, proof case, I think one of the reasons it's hard to speak about is that the moment that we accept that there will be losses and start to deal with that and you know, I imagine the normal human time that we try to minimize those losses of those damages, we are tacitly accepting, or actually assigning people to the suffering. We're going to save you, but not you. There's no other way to deal with those things without implicitly doing that. That's, you know, it's a horrifying and impossible conversation to step into it most people I imagine we just rather not have it. Mark. Yeah, thank you. The very question I asked when speaking of climate change is, what are we or what are you willing to sacrifice. There's no other way of, you know, looking at it with up. Thank you for speaking about Syria and you know it's all these people are, you know, moving through Europe and eventually ending up in, you know, countries like Germany, the Netherlands, France and so forth. Then a very few of them are coming here. But we have plenty already here with people that have been displaced to make room for, you know, fulfilling our needs, quote unquote needs, our desire for better life, more comfortable life. And we're not really talking about that in the context of climate change. Thank you. Thanks Mark. Let's go back to check ins and we'll do Judy Pete Mark. I'm going to go off in a little different tangent because much of my energies has been coming together with overlap and invested energies of other people in the bigger topic of discrimination and inclusion diversity all of those dimensions. And I'll mention to this group if you're not aware that there's a an early quest forming in OGM in matter most on opening OGM which is really all around inclusion diversity. It's in the context of OGM but you can't deal with it without dealing with the larger context as well. I put in the chat in matter most also in that channel, couple of really strong videos one that had been put in by Kevin coded bias, and another one that I've been using for months called portrait of a scientist which is about gender, gender abuse in the sciences, which is hosted by some very strong senior elder scientists so they're sort of giving a lifetime perspective and then, at what point they really engaged actively to change things. I think at the heart of it. I think I'm drawn to this topic because it's, it's more addressable at the human level than it is something like climate change which requires massive levels of focus and so many different areas. And I applaud all of you that are really working actively on the big climate change question, because I think it's super important. That's probably enough for a check in people want more info, find me on matter most or wherever. Thank you, Judy. And one of the things that rang my personal bell recently was not that that that are partly our mission is to go into other communities where we're in the minority, and participate there and be helpful and see if that works and trying to attract lots of people and measuring success by gosh did we manage statistically to diversify our group, which I, which is a evidence I would love to have at the end of the game, but one of the more fruitful communities like that that I'm part of is run by who's at the garrison Institute, and is working on contemplation contemplative change, education based healing, a bunch of other really interesting things and I'm going to be his guest for a forum in a couple weeks I'll post the link. Here I would love for us to attend and I was part of a similar form yesterday where his guest was Michael Eric Dyson. And Dyson was off the charts awesome and like, we're half an hour in. It's already fascinating and it was really great. And then, Angel asks, Michael. Talk about hip hop, because I didn't realize that he runs really deep on studying hip hop as a phenomenon and he can quote lots of hip hop. And so he starts basically riffing on Habermas and a bunch of feel a lot feel origins I had not heard of and I was busy crazy with hip hop and posting sort of Wikipedia links back into the chat, and a bunch of other things, just really weaving things together in a beautiful beautiful way it was like it was a masterpiece. Anyway, I'm trying and I'm sitting here puzzling, you know, I don't want to hijack that group I don't want to. I'm not quite clear what to do other than try to be helpful in that group. I just want to sort of help each other find our way into other groups that matter. Mark, you're in a bunch of conversations like like this that that we might be able to join and others as well so to just want to say that that this is a really important thing we can do I think it's it's very. It feeds our purpose really beautifully to be helpful to communities that are struggling in at least one of the num, the named crises that I put in and, you know, again, whether you think there's five or 20 crises, the, there's, we're in the middle of a whole bunch of mutually reinforcing kind of crises and it's a it's a cycle that seems too big to manage. So with that, let's go back to Pete Mark Gil. Thanks Jerry. I apologize in advance for what I'm going to say. I know that we're moving up kind of a maturity level. So we've made it mostly out of zoom chat into matter most for instance, and that seems like a good thing. It's useful. We don't have any remorse about helping us move to matter most because that the ability for us to have chat call chats there has a knock on effect of letting us expand in space to have multiple groups start be able to start and continue in the matter most. So that's all wonderful. And now I have the bad news that there's more of the maturity curve. So if that part scares you just pretend that I'm talking nonsense and gibberish. But I wanted to talk about it just real briefly. So one of the things that that I'm starting to do that's connected to OGM wiki is just to take meeting notes, fairly copiously. So, so this is, you know, along with trying to talk and trying to listen and things like that, I was able to catch this much stuff. I could have put all of this into the matter most chat. But if I put it into a document, then this document will stay around longer, and it's more focused and concentrated as, you know, this was this meeting. Someday, it will be more than just me typing here, other people will be typing as well. And we'll we'll learn how to do it together so that when somebody's talking and I'm starting to write a bullet somebody else will either be correcting the typos in my bullet or making another bullet. And then somebody else will maybe be merging bullets together or expanding them or adding links and stuff like that. So, this is kind of a weird little interface. It happens to be marked down on the side and HTML on the side. And this is called Hack MD. And, and so the beauty of Hack MD is that lots of people can edit all at the same time. So then that goes into and I didn't actually set this one up. Yeah, HACK MD. Thanks. Dot com was it? I forgot. Yeah, I think it's, yeah, it's actually. It's.io. Yeah, exactly. It's not.com. And now a little bit more forbearance. If I can show you what OGM wiki looks on like on my screen. I didn't pre preload this so it happens to be bill Anderson's profile page, which, which is fine. We're getting a fair number of these over here are each individual pages in the OGM wiki. So I know I've been talking about OGM wiki and it's like, you know, it's this really cool thing but don't get involved yet. We're still unfortunately kind of at that place where connecting up to OGM wiki is a little bit hard. It's, it's really just sitting down with me or bill Anderson or maybe somebody else for about 15 minutes and kind of getting 15 minutes to get kind of started and then another 15 minutes to like really relax and to okay now I understand kind of what's going on and how to how to work with y'all. But this the way that HACK MD works for one page the wiki works for lots of pages. So we've got about 60 pages in here right now. And the page that Jerry Jerry and I started about his observation about the diamond sutra. It's almost empty but this is a reminder for Jerry to come back and do more of it. I can go back to looking at another can go to my profile if you want. Yeah, so obviously wikis have links. And, and then because copied bills a copied bills profile page and then started elaborating on it and then started figuring out how to back into some of the structures we've been talking about which are clearly not finished yet but go ahead Pete sorry. And there's a back link here to diamond sutra. Jerry put a link over there so that he would remember to go back to diamond sutra someday. I've done this also for the last two calls that I was in GM Thursday call this is basically just me typing, but we can actually do more than that together as as a team or a collective or something that like that. Back to that hack MD thing. Multiple people can do it at once on one page and then multiple people can work on multiple pages on the wiki. So, so now to come back to for the people who are ignoring me when I was talking about, you know, like getting too complicated and too many tools. We're, we're still our status is still kind of nascent. It's kind of a little bit of a challenge to get to get involved but I think, once you're past that 15 or 30 minute starter session and then maybe a 15 or 30 minute refresher session and, and some questions on matter most. It's not a lot different than working in Microsoft Word or Google Docs or something like that. And then. So, you know, in two or three or six months, lots of people will doing it be doing ogm wiki together. I invite, invite you and I actually kind of ask you request you. We need, we need more people in the mix, even though we're not quite to the point where it's super easy to do. It's pretty easy once you get started. So I'm asking, you know, if you're interested, Eric is actually already kind of signed up. Vincent is signed up to get an onboarding for flotilla Friday. I'm looking for more people I would love to just work with you and get it done. And by the way, of course, all of that, all of the effort that I'm putting into it is helping fix the world and fix climate change and helping you fix climate change and, you know, everything else, all the other problems that we have. So that's my pitch. Thank you. And if you'll bear with me, I've got a bunch of questions for you. So, so first, like, I, you have ninja skills that are insane and I love it when you, when you like show your ninja skills, not by showing your ninja skills, but by showing what you're doing, it's just like, Wow, because, because you're not only monitoring like like this and that and taking notes, but you're also answering questions and, you know, doing research in the background, and you're having insane multitasking and research skills, among other things. Second, thank you for demoing og wiki ogm wiki that's like fabulous that that we have a view into it together as a group and for asking people and inviting them in. I'm, and you're taking notes separately during calls where we're doing group chat is confusing to me because now I don't know where to watch or where to help because I really want to be in the chat with everybody, and co authoring in Markdown breaks my head. So, so I think one of our longer term questions is what are those relationships between these things how does it work, but more than that, I want to sort of bump your challenge up another level. When we talk about the five crises or the stack or whatever else, those should actually be curated pages in our wiki and in the world that we're improving as we have these conversations so so the fact that we take notes during a meeting is still just a notes, it's still just a meeting page in a wiki someplace that that should actually have a lot of embedded links to the actual things that we're working on and improving all the time so that as a hive mind as a collective intelligence, we are making the pieces that matter better. The pieces that are visible to the outside world that aren't internal minutes right, so I think that that conversation about chat minutes objects wiki other kinds of things is a really juicy conversation for us and we should experiment with it we should figure out what to do and how it works. Then, I loved it when you put your note taking behind you and I don't know if that disrupted you Pete or whatever but the idea that you were on this call taking notes and being able to see what it was and remember that oh that's right Pete's taking notes and then to go look at it every now and then because you should have the link with us. That was really useful when you did it. So I don't know if you want to keep doing it or if that actually disrupts you. And because you're taking such copious notes in HackMD, I miss your beautiful participation on the matter most chat as much as you do. And when you when you're playing. When you're, or what's the word connectors mavens when you're mavenizing on a chat as part of a conversation it changes the nature of the chat. Like, like everybody in the chat starts to realize that there's like this, like this incredible superpower that's just like with our best intentions listening on the side and helping make things better. And so where you apply that kind of matters to the group in some sense, right, where that work is manifest. And the fact that it's manifested meeting notes is really productive and super cool except we're not watching that right now. So, all this is about how do we, how do we collaboratively feed the termite fungus, so that so that all of society can can feed off its nectar. And so, so I think what you just showed us and we're talking about is an important piece of what we're trying to build. Go ahead Doug. Maybe we need as many as there are hyper objects. I'm trying to get some cheek cells. A long experience of different kinds of online media. I'm struck by how the focus is often on how to get the stuff in, and how rare the focus is on trying to improve getting stuff out. Another huge and wonderful issue Pete please I wanted to go back to you just so you can comment back. I think, I think Doug's point is an interesting one and one of the so that's another maturity level thing right how do you get the information back out so for to first order for me actually the the meeting notes at this point or the chat the chat. That matter most chat is at least a way of capturing it where we can see it still. So the maturity level we had before that is we have calls and we have recordings and some people watch them but mostly we can't access that memory so we've moved it from mostly offline memory in YouTube to semi online memory in Mattermost and and wiki and then at some point we'll be able to move from there we can actually remember and see things and think about them to actually bringing them to the for more more often. So I think Jerry one of the so that you're totally right now I'm doing meeting notes instead of chat I could have been typing all that stuff into the chat and everybody now is missing it. Um, so I backed into this I didn't realize it if I had if I had realized that maybe I would have constructed things differently but it's a it's a I think of it as a maturity thing. Instead of most people being in Mattermost chat. Most people should actually be in HackMD. I'm trying to tell you that that even back in etherpad, when multiple people are busy editing a document like this to me it's a very different creature from seeing a chat where I know that I'm watching what people are thinking at the time, and there's time stamps, and those are qualitatively very different experiences for me. Yeah, maybe a way to think about that Judy and Jerry and and I have had a fair amount of experience working together Jerry and I are working in HackMD typing. Judy actually does a really interesting thing. She's got she's got her computer and she's got an iPad. So what she does is she kind of watches the zoom on her computer and then on our iPad. She watches the document as it's coming together as it's being built. So it is qualitatively different to watch the meeting notes happen in but it's not. It's actually I think better it's a better experience more or less to see meeting notes coalescing instead of a continually scrolling thing of chat. So, you know that it's, it's, it's more organized in a document than a whole chat thing, even though it's not quite as addressable you know I can't go back to this and make a comment or something like that. You should order AI. Yes, the reason the reason we're right this minute we're in connective next collective next zoom account because they have a business account that allows them to use the order I transcripts so we do have a transcript file for me every Thursday call and because Charles and like kept kept going hey where's the transcript I have moved all those into a shareable Google Drive folder we can get to easily. So anybody who wants to work on the other transcripts that's available. So, Otter the thing that George is talking about is Otter is actually it's typing, you know it's listening and typing verbatim what you're saying to the to the level of understanding of the machine intelligence that's that's doing it. So it'll get some words wrong and things like that but you can go back and fix it and you can watch that transcript happen in real time. That's kind of a good thing and a bad thing. Well, the notes that I'm taking are actually a digested version of what people are saying right so it's not verbatim what they said but it's the condensed and summarized and up leveled a little bit version of that. And so, especially if we had one or two more people doing the thing, the meeting notes together with it wouldn't catch all the ums and that's and you know the the backwards and forwards things that people do with sentences. It turns them, you know, my notes are more like shorter, pithy, pithy things rather than a longer sentence. So, so to come back to the dichotomy between matter most chat and the meeting notes in hack and D. I think this this crew maybe maybe not but I think this crew would actually be able to up level into hack and D for most of the stuff that we do in chat during the calls. The chat that we're having in calls is not really back and forth chat it's not question answers the kind that we see in the massive wiki channel for instance, or the flow till a channel or emergent events sense making. Those are like, you know, asynchronous conversations where, you know, we might answer, but we're asking questions we're having conversation kind of semi synchronously. The chat that we do in matter most is a lot more about, you know, it's almost taking notes of kind of, you know, adding links and things like that. If we move that activity into the hack and D. I think it'll be better for everybody. So now to back up. I don't want that to sound like, oh, everybody has to use, you know, hack and D everybody has to learn how to figure out how document works and take notes while we're listening to a call to back up. Even in this call we're having we're having a pretty good chat back and forth and discussion and links and stuff like that in the zoom chat. So I think an important important thing, maybe the most important thing is participate where you're where you feel comfortable. Don't feel like you have to get dragged into, you know, yet another tool or yet another tool or yet another way of thinking or anything like that. It's okay if it's some of us, it doesn't have to be everybody. I'm totally fine with with the conversation happening where it happens and how people can manage that I think that's, that's awesome. It's more important that you're participating and participating in a way that you feel comfortable. Then, you know, then anything else, that's the most important thing. But if, if folks can push themselves or if they're, especially if they're called to if they feel interested in I want to know a little bit more about how to where we're going with, you know, the, the evolution from zoom chat to HackMD to OGM wiki. HackMD is where you start thinking together and and the wiki and HackMD together is where you're actually thinking about multiple things at once. And you can hold that space collectively, not just as one brain. Oh, I've got all these amazing thoughts and I wish I could get them out, you know, it's, it's that you can actually have this expanded information space in which we can work together and multi think we can collectively think we can collectively sense make. So that's where all these tools end up. And by the time you've got OGM wiki and and HackMD and zoom, we can do multi minding together we can actually think together we can remember together and remember and think over time from week to week from day to day from month to month from year to year. And then we can take the OGM wiki and share that with Kiko lab and metacogs and the rest of the world. So that's where all of this is going multi thinking multi multi remembering together collectively. That's, and that's what those tools are for. Just to lay around a little bit of complexity. Sorry, Vincent, could you meet your, your line. Just to lay around a little more complexity. Max and Charles and a few other people were busy post processing our calls and mining them for information at one point max took the transcript and mapped it in Miro, because he's a he can code Miro. And so, if you've been following this whole conversation so far, you could eventually see like six layers deep. The same set of topics and conversation going through where, if you play the video, it could go to the track the full transcript the digest transcript the chat, the post processing of what happened, etc, etc, I'll find the Miro map. And we can we can put post that in the in the chat. But, but all of that is, if you'll forgive us an explosion of complexity on our way I think to finding simpler ways of working together, where we can share what we know which is the objective of open global line. And it's going to get a little more rocky and confusing like this I think over time. Go ahead Judy. So just to interject the point that you're kind of wrapping with Jerry, I think we have to pay attention to the full mining of all of the information and its aggregation sorting for wisdom, and the brevity of being in the moment and dealing with what's happening in the moment. And that's a very visible dichotomy that we should put in a side channel to digest and figure out optimal ways to approach. And I'm sorry I'm looking away trying to find something. And so I have a long list and probably not enough time to get through class did you want to jump in. You're muted. I had a conversation yesterday in a work session training session here with the evolution Institute for evolutionary leadership. And we bear in breakout rooms can was there also the, what occurred to me is that the, the model that Donald metals provided, you know, in the places to intervene in the system is creating a certain hierarchy at the highest level at the paradigm level. We're talking about product based storylines that govern our, our understanding of the world around us and the way we, we should make decisions. But what I was saying, I'm actually operating about three levels below paradigm level because I'm looking at how can I translate that into my field of expertise and implement it for and make it useful in practical terms. So if we look at the information as a hierarchy, right so there are some conversations that are floating at paradigm level, and then you go down below that and you look at various phases of implementation it's almost like an administrative structure where where paradigm is being translated and so I thought that was sort of an important mind picture to see where to categorize information, and I don't know how Pete how you would possibly do that from a systems perspective, but it helps me as a mental model. I love that. Let's go to Mark Gil Vincent. And with apologies, several of us must bounce at the, at the hash, and so we won't make it through everybody. But let's go as quickly as we can Mark Gil Vincent. Yeah, I'll go, I'll go very quick and actually just on on the OGM topic. I made a couple of suggestions and I really don't know how difficult they are to implement. One of the now what group network. There are a couple of features on their website that I think would be super useful for everyone. One is the network map. And the other one is a calendar. That would be would probably make it a little bit easier for newcomers to get to know everyone in advance and themselves to express their intentions in joining the group. And the second thing that I wanted to talk about that was touched by Kevin Celeste email to the group about diversity. And one of the idea that I had was perhaps opening a new slot of time, maybe on Wednesday morning, right before the Thursday call, and have, you know, people from diversity backgrounds. Make a presentation one or two or three, you know, during an hour and hour and a half. That would make them probably feel a bit more comfortable joining the group, as I mentioned, probably other times that can feel a bit intimidating. Well, with this I'm complete. I love that idea Mark. Okay. Yeah, sometimes relatively simple ideas like they're pretty transformative so I appreciate your. I think that's a great suggestion mark and I wonder if, if you're not already participating in the quest channel on opening up OGM, where we're focusing the diversity stuff. Matt say and I are trying to establish a core group of people who want to pursue that topic. And this would fit there as well as in a right before OGM call mode. So I'd like to talk further about that. Is it that's that's in the master it's in matter most is in the channel called opening Joe opening OGM. Okay. And yeah there's a link to it in the chat if you scroll up a little bit. We have at this point Gil Vincent Michael. Thanks Mark. Well, wow, everybody just complete Wow. So many platforms so little time. Yes, exactly. It's raining platforms. It's raining platforms I'm in delicious overwhelm every time I'm in one of these calls. I'm listening not as an, you know, not not as not as a geek interested in designing platforms but how I can bring some of this stuff to civilians, which is who I normally work with and, you know, so Pete to the, you know, to the mark down on what you wrote us I can't see how to how to drop that into a call with civilians in the same way that I can matter most but I'm, you know, fascinatingly intrigued. Just a moment on on on the racism conversation then I want to talk about what I'm doing. There's a lot of posts that are deeply deeply moving and painful, sort of exposing me to the everyday experience of black Americans there was something by David Gray that I don't have a link for it enough that he saw where he recounted as a black man, taking his child to school and all the things that he needed not to do. Like not have a fresh and hanging from his mirror and have his plates visible and then it was like, it was like a litany of 30 elements of daily life that he cannot do with the name of a dead person attached to each one of them. Chris rock made it more simply said, I've asked people and I can't find a white person would want to trade places with me in my life, and I'm rich. And that kind of summed it up in a very clear way for me. Thank you for hyper objects, it adds a little bit of sense to the stuff that I'm grappling with I posted a, in matter most the stack that I'm looking at. And I'm in the question all the time but how do we face hyper objects without terror, and without resignation. And, and with that I wonder a lot about how things change. I remember back of remembering back lately to work that I was doing in the 1980s around nuclear freeze, where I was basically being a propagandist piece propagandist and that one point started to ask people activists, you know, rank and file activists and highly notable activists, how, how do things change. And I was stunned by the percentage of blank stares that I got from people. I was struck by also by something else we were. We did a lot of small group house party work and in a couple of them, we took people through an exercise of visualizing the future, imagining the future. And again I was stunned by the number of people who came up with with with with with black, like their screen the screen faded to black right at the start they couldn't see anything. For me that the vision of the future has always been part of my theory of change. And so I wonder about those stories in relation to now. The main story for me as I'm resuming next Wednesday. A webinar series that I began last year in the midst of the early COVID crisis talking about clump COVID and climate and the similarities and differences between those two hyper objects as we call them now. And the phrase that is behind it for me is that I'm finding that people want to have meaningful conversations that move worlds. So I'm trying to provide a platform for that saying you know, people want that let's have some. So this will be next Wednesday at noon I'll send everybody out an invitation you're welcome to join Pete in particular I want to extend an invitation to you because I would love for you to either do what you do or just watch what you do and make any suggestions about how to make that a richer and more robust and leverage conversation I'm thinking at this point of bringing bringing in matter most as a better chat channel than the zoom chat so we have persistence and I don't think we can go to the to the to the markdown approach right now. I'm thinking about mighty networks as a back end for that community, both for the general conversations and specific breakouts and courses that may come of that. So in matter most the stack that's front of mind for me I'm not going to read through the whole thing includes some of the things we've talked about earlier and some others. Somebody posted that humans don't care. That may be true I think more likely humans do care but they fall into despair, which leads to resignation, which comes out of like I can't possibly do anything about this. That's one of the questions to consider and sort of the, the core provocation that I'm raising is how do we live with grace and calm and dignity and power in the midst of all this. So that's what I'm trying to curate George to your, your evolution of, you know, I forget the forum was managed something facilitate. You know, I'm thinking of the role of curation of providing a place and nurturing a kind of conversation that can get us to somewhere new. So these will be monthly. They're, they're the leading edge of what I'm hoping to build under the working name of critical path Academy to be courses and discourses around these issues and I decided with with a kick in the ass from my wife a couple of weeks ago to not try to build out the Academy but just get on get online with the first piece and then build it organically from there so that's coming up next week. Let me just add one other thing I was on the conference the last two days called green fin 21 it's about the green finance climate finance ESG finance etc from green biz comm, one of the major platforms around business sustainability. And I was really struck that there was a lot of talk about reforming capitalism inclusive capitalism stakeholder capitalism people talk about conscious capitalism. I've been listening this in conferences, I go to a lot of these conferences and I've been listening for anybody who will talk about concentration of wealth distribution of ownership, and, and the structural flaws that are embedded in capitalism formed or not true to form nobody spoke about it. Lots of talk about inclusion people talk about employee engagement but not employee ownership. So, there's a very interesting, both ferment in the conversation about capitalism sort of a subterranean sense that something is deeply wrong in the world we're living in, but an inability to really grapple with it. Head on, or even talk about it in intelligent ways so that's one of the conversations I hope to provoke I love the richness of both these conversations and the tools that we're playing with here. I find myself exhausted just in this call hopping between, you know, zoom and matter most like to, I'm tired. This is your morning exercise. This is my morning exercise and it's aerobic man my fingers are burning. Yeah, yeah, feel the burn baby feel the burn, feel the burn. But it leaves me puzzled about how do we, how do we generate mutual rich, you know multi layered learning environments that civilians can handle. And maybe that you know civilians need coaches and curators and you know and and folks helping them do it maybe that maybe there's some stuff for meta in every group to have somebody like Pete or with certain trained capabilities to do some enhancement to the level of interaction. She excels. I keep years ago I tried to convince Pete to start a practice called mavenology and to train and to train other people to do what he does. It's time Pete. He excels. Mark, did you want to comment or not you had your hand up earlier. Yeah, I was I was only wanted to, to, to deal with what you were saying about desperation. And I think what can definitely help is inspiration. Thank you. Last two comments Eric and Mike, Michael and then we're going to have to wrap this call I'm afraid. I have a workshop and a talk with John Marks he created search for common ground and it's one of the largest piece that works in the world. And he in his workshop he says he never gets burned out. And he's got like 13 principles I want to refine them again, where I put them. One of them is just take distance. He takes a lot of distance he doesn't take anything personal. That's one of his principles. And if the world problems is not his personal problem. And that's how he was able. One of the reasons why he was able to continue what he was doing without ever getting burned out so it's one of the things he's sure those links with us. Thank you. Yeah, I was just going to say hearing what what Gil was saying, and this is my check into but that it really feels like there's a connection between what Pete was saying about wealth concentration. I was just saying about, you know, left us all silent about loss of life and loss of habitat. And I think it's that that wealth concentration has so much influence over decision making and and information dissemination that, you know, people are not able to make the decisions that they need to make that, you know, we're, we're easier to make consensually in in, you know, at FDRs time, perhaps people are willing to make those consensually. But the things that Doug is talking about are these non consensual inevitabilities loss of life and loss of habitat. What needs to happen is loss of wealth, and loss of privilege and loss of, you know, power, and the people who maintain their grip on that, increasingly as Pete was saying, are stopping us from dealing with issues like climate change so dealing with with income disparity and wealth concentration is key to dealing with climate change and everything else. And the question for me there is, is there any way to get it that. There's no way to get it that short of pitchforks and torches at the castle gates. Well, this company I consulted for back 30 years ago said that in the Netherlands had an income tax bracket of 110%. So it was a disincentive to get very wealthy. With that, I think we need to wrap this call. Thank you, folks, which has been steamy and wonderful. I really appreciate it. Vincent, I'm sorry I didn't get to your comments. I just must be on the next call and several of you didn't get checked in but thank you so much this has been awesome. Thanks everyone.