 Yeah, that seems, but it all, I mean, it all takes a lot of work to be accurate for once, you know, I mean, this whole editing process. And then my partner in climate systems solutions, I mean, he wants to commercialize this and see how we can create, you know, a revenue generating function out of all this. And he comes from the biofuel sector. So he's very interested in creating biofuels and the big thing there is low carbon intensity, which would be which is an interesting idea to reward farmers who have already done the right thing. You know, a lot of these carbon schemes are really paying for farmers to do something different than they have done before. So they're now accumulating farmers that leaves out all the farmers who have already done this for many years, and who already have a carbon rich soil, you know, and so this this carbon intensity score shifts focus on the carbon content. And I'm not quite sure of the side, I have to check the science more. But it measures the carbon intensity of the crop coming out of that soil. So a farmer who has been doing this for 20 years instantly gets a higher reward, gets a higher score, which then generates a higher return in the markets. That's the idea. Yeah, yeah. The farm bill should contain a tax measure that benefits greatly farmers who have high soil organic matter and penalizes those who have dead soil, just like it should be a very sharp gradient. Yeah, same principle. Can you get that inserted in the farm bill? Yes. You're talking to all the right people. I mean, is there any motion like that anywhere near the farm bill? Yeah, there is a lot of motion in there. The challenge is to structure the carbon markets in ways that they make sense and don't just greenwash and distribute rewards in a fair manner. That has been why these things don't really work so far. So this carbon intensity scores of my partners all over this because it would give breathing space to the biofuel sector when they're buying low carbon intensity crops. Because when you really measure out what these biofuels generate, I mean, you put more calories in, then you get out. So just by the time if you figure everything that goes into the ground in terms of fertilizers and water and the energy for the tractors and hauling and what have you, and then you convert this into biofuel, the energy you're getting out of it is less than what got what went into it. And so that's now becoming obvious and can no longer hide it. So this carbon intensity score is one avenue. The other one is to create an organic label that rewards certified organic products in the market. So you get a higher market price for it. Thank you. I think that's part of the carbon intensity indicator thing. Anyone else? Rick, Dave, you guys want to check in in the neobooks like context? Hey guys, you know, just came to listen to hear what's going on. Yeah, I saw some on the biofuels thing. Somebody said something like, you know, oil has been, it was compressed biofuels for, you know, millions of years. And that's why it's so intense. And this notion that we can grow it in a year and burn it the same year and have some kind of equivalent sea is, is crazy. There's like, oh, yeah, it kind of makes sense. So Dave's like, from the sense that we've been burning millions of years of reserve. Thanks for the idea that we can grow it in a year and replace it. I got our message this morning from my more conservative friend than me who lives in just north of the Columbia in Washington. And it was, I had sent him back, I had sent him last week, Al Gore's recent talk, which I thought was pretty good, like Al Gore's angry and, you know, he talks about how cop got taken over by the oil interests and blah, blah, blah. And my friend Scott came back and said, yeah, but oil production is at an all time high thanks to the U.S. in the globe. And then he points to a whole bunch of other stats. He says, is it even realistic to think that this is going to go away? And there's some kind of new conversations that need to be held in the middle of all that. And I don't know who's, I wish I knew who's sort of, who's having the right conversation that people will listen to. So I don't know. It's depressing. And any sort of news after cop? Cop 28? A class? Did anything interesting come out of it? Well, the interesting part is that for the first time, there was one full day dedicated to agriculture, food and agriculture. And I think it's now up to over 150 countries signed a commitment to change the agricultural practices, you know, wherever that leads. But there is now a clear recognition that agriculture contributes almost a third of global emissions. That's one line. And then at the same time, it depletes our act with us. It pollutes water sheds. It creates nutritional deficiencies. So you have a whole basket of stuff that all come into fuel for the first time. And Al Gore picked up on agriculture. I spent some time with the climate reality project. And he did a phenomenal summation. I mean, the agency that's working for him, they actually commissioned me to develop a strategic outline and extrapolated this into a six-hour presentation was interused with Secretary of Agriculture Wilserck and Senator Stabenow and others. So that was pretty incredible because he is a phenomenal orator. And he has the ability to create mind pictures that really hit through. So that was interesting. There is a starting point for agriculture to really take off. It's the same level of intensity that you see in the energy sector. Let's just hope it goes further. Is anybody picking up that banner and running with it? I mean, who are the most likely orgs of any mass, of any scale who care about that and are doing something? Is it the Sierra Club? Is it who? The Sierra Club is actually super disappointing. I think their funding sources are compromising them. The climate reality project, we have a strategy session with the 96 chapters that belong to them this coming, I think, Thursday. And because there is now a pause in the farm bill negotiations, the farm bill 2023 has been extended to 2024. So we have one year to regroup. And so strategically, we need to now engage with farmers, 90% of who vote to Republican, because they just don't have the connections. Now, they're very emotionally tied to the land. You can't talk about climate change that has been seriously polluted. So you need to talk about soil. So we're developing talking points where we can advise the chapters, very motivated people. I mean, there are literally thousands of members who are very excited about talking to legislators and talking to people who may make a difference, but create talking points that get farmers interested and explain to them how they are voting against their own interests by supporting Republicans here. Because Republicans are actually against farm bill reforms that would assist small-scale farmers to get market access, to get financial support, to get money for ecosystem services and all of those things. Thanks, Klaus. Rick, any progress with thoughts on your front? Excuse me. Yeah, you know, I've been sort of tracking things on LinkedIn from different perspectives on COP28. And it's really fascinating to see the diversity of perspectives on it, all the way from people who say we shouldn't be taking any oil out of the earth whatsoever, which is highly unrealistic, although it'd be laudable if it was possible. But somebody I've been tracking for a while, who I've been following some of his posts on health. And he's the executive director of something called the World Health Innovation Summit. And I think they're trying to put a greater presence of health, the health consequences of climate change. I haven't been tracking it closely, but I've just been tracking it through LinkedIn. And then on the sub-stack front, I'm still playing around with it. And I'm really enjoying using Dali. And I thought I would just do a very quick screen share of an image that I came up with to, you know, fun and play games playing. Let me see if I can pull this up here a little bit. But anyway, this is the title of it is ethics, equanimity, egalitarianism, how we might compose poems and tell stories to cultivate the feminist doctrine of equity governance. And I'm about two thirds of the way through it. In terms of finishing off this blog post, one of the features it does have that you can send previews to people in advance to get feedback. And the other is, is to set up in such a way that if people are interested or you have a group of people collaborating like a cohort of writers who instead of going on their internal systems of sharing information would go public, it might be interesting to see whether you might be able to create a Mycelium network around a cadre of people who post on one place, but cross-reference their different contributions. So this is work in progress. So I thought I would just share something that I was just working on this morning, came up with this visual image this morning. So that's me over and out. Thanks, Rick. I think it was on this call last week or something recent. Pete or someone else mentioned Posse, P-O-S-S-E and Pose, which are basically approaches toward posting on your own site and then cross-posting all over the place elsewhere as a way of building the Mycelium connections you were just talking about. Pete, if you could put those, if you got any links to that information, that would be great. Oh, for sure. You should have done it. No sooner thought than done. Thank you. This is, I'm new to the idea of Posse, although I have thought about the same thing. They've got a couple other, I don't even know how many there are, but the acronym comes from a community called IndyWeb and they're, it's a fairly old organization I used to hang out with some of these folks a long time ago. But the general idea is, it's actually before folks like us started talking about decentralization or maybe it's a couple iterations ago, I guess, literally like 20 years ago they were talking about this kind of stuff. And the idea of the IndyWeb is that you make your stuff, you own your stuff and then you distribute it out rather than going to Facebook or wherever and contributing to their infrastructure. So as it happens, I'm going to, they've got an in-person meeting this weekend in San Diego and I'm going to attend. It's their first in-person meeting since the pandemic and it'll be mine too. Lovely. I have missed Posse, so I've got Pose and Posse, but I missed Posse, so adding that. Thank you. I had joined your meeting last week, I think on Friday, about the landscape renewal idea. Yeah, thanks for doing that. And I had to leave early, but can you just sort of put us a quick frame around what you're trying to do there? The notion is that we want to organize the intellectual assets that are going to support landscape regeneration in the comms. And in computing, around the internet, you would talk about building a stack. And so I was using a stack metaphor for, or it's like, I was thinking it's like, we have other, you know, like it's a library, a library is where we put intellectual assets too, but a library is like, so you can find them and reuse them. The stack, you're improving, you know, it's kind of built into the notion of the stack as you're continually improving the tools. And so yeah, so that was the thought was that landscape regeneration is going to be really important. If we're all successful, we have to regenerate a bunch of landscapes. So let's just assume we're going to do that. And if you're going to regenerate a bunch of landscapes, we're going to learn a bunch and we're going to get better at it. And that knowledge is either going to be captured by, you know, commercial interests, it's going to be disaggregated and not very useful, or it's going to be organized in the comms. So let's make sure it's organized in the comms. Yay. Go ahead, Koss. So do you need, do you need this to generate revenue? So I lost myself. That's one of the fun bits. So this, the notion of the stack implies a business model. So people are, for some reason, there's a positive reinforcement cycle where people are using it and improving it, using it and improving it, which I think is a business model. So in some sense, the resources in the stack have a business model. And so something like Word Press is a pretty good example, I think, of an open source commons with a business model. So there's a whole bunch of people who make their living out of things associated to Word Press. And in that is a cycle that makes Word Press get better as you do it. So we would somehow need to design the same kind of thing, I think, for landscape regeneration. Yeah. But I'm also assuming that's a, you know, in my mind, landscape regeneration is, in some sense, it's tautologically profitable. Regeneration means that we have more value at the end than we did at the beginning. And the question then is somehow, how do you allocate that new value? And some of it should go to the people who helped create it to do livelihoods and stuff. So there's going to be consulting firms and farmers and companies in that system who are selling services, you know, doing analysis, writing legal contracts, whatever it is. And yeah, so somehow or another, the system needs to deliberately incent them to improve the open source commons materials. Tell me, Paul, how much, which parts of the selling bullshit, but that's how I think of it. And one of the mistakes that, one of the reasons to put this to say this out loud is that lots of people say, oh, we're doing open source, you know, and what they really mean is they opened a license, they made something available in the commons, but there is no business model. So it will not improve. And really, I think, is the improvement part that's critical. The stack has to get better. It has to get bigger, right? The stack will grow more and more level layers of intelligence will get added to it and lower layers should improve and hopefully at least remain stable. And a lot of the current stuff is like you throw around the words, but there's no concept of an actual improvement cycle. When I was listening, when I was listening into the comments, what came to mind was a business model that is the intentional community because it's a very similar concept of basically selling ideas and know-how. And by dividing the intentional communities into many subsections, right, into modules, for by type, and then they are offering training courses and training materials, which you have to buy. But when you look at their website, it gives you a part entry into this concept of intentional community. And then you can zoom down into what you may be of interest to you and then you can buy into it. So it seems like when you think of landscaping, I mean urban agriculture comes to mind as part of it. And so many different approaches or different applications, right? So maybe that kind of segmentation would also help to be more specific in who to help and with what. Does it make sense? Yeah, I haven't seen that. I haven't seen any of the intentional community stuff, so I don't know it at all. Yeah, and so I mean, and I'm using landscape as a proxy for like bioregion too, right? So not just landscaping, but the notion of an integrated, it's a physical location that has economic and biodiversity and social components, right? So I'm thinking of, I don't know, Acapulco as a landscape, right? And so the notion that we would regenerate, you know, Porta Viarta or something like that is kind of the level I think we should be thinking at and which implies, right, a huge commercial interest with lots of money flowing through it. And also, hopefully, I know Dorn had a good word for like how open source works, it's like, let's stuck it in the document, I think I can remember the term. But you know, the contributions, the contributions don't come in your, in your, in the area you're competing in, right? You contribute to the areas that are, you don't care about it in some sense, right? It's the, it's the infrastructure in the system that's easiest to have be held in the commons because that's cost, not return. So if I can, if I can lower my cost by contributing into the commons, I'm more inclined to do that. So and I think the Linux, that's how the Linux operating system works, right? Nobody wants to build an operating system. They want the things operating systems do. So they want the cheapest operating system they can possibly get that does the things they need so they can do the things they want, right? So IBM is willing to invest back into Linux because it's cheaper than not, right? And so I think we want to find a bunch of industry, you know, analysts make like people are doing hydrology analysis, you know, we want them to use the hydrology analysis stack that has a regenerative flavor because it's cheaper than them building their own stack. And yeah, they're going to have to modify it. So it suits the Columbia River. But then put that back in the stack. David, what do you see as being the impact of using AI in more efficient ways to be able to enable that? Because I think AI kind of makes it just is another order. I mean, I assume the stack concept is still useful in this context. Maybe it's not, but I think it's still useful. And I'm using it. I like it. That doesn't mean it's useful, but I'm all in on thinking and trying to explain stuff in terms of stacks. And there's also a piece of conversation with Pete. I've been having a few times over about how do we visualize those stacks? Because because making your way up and down the layers is useful and interesting as an explanatory tool. And then focusing on one layer exclusively at a time then lets you sort of deepen and clarify what you mean by that layer of the stack. And there isn't, I have not found a visualization tool that lets me do that in any reasonable way. I really think there's a notion of a stack of stacks. But I've talked to a couple of Hodgson's trying to do some AI tools. And one of the things he was pointing out is that his AI tool meets the stack, right? He needs to train it on stack. So that he needs this often a common resource, you know, to enable AI at the first place. This was not so. I mean, it seems to be two areas. One is how can AI more efficiently enable people to contribute? That's one. The other is to go in and how can AI help you search things in a way that makes it more efficient to extract? So it's both input and output. I don't know if there's anything out there that any of you techie knows that are where this is going. But I see that as an application. Yeah, I think that's a lot of sense. Findability. Exactly. They're beginning to develop things, but they're very early stage about how to search electronic medical records for information. I tell you, it's a nightmare. You know, it's not easy. You waste so much time. So I'm looking forward to when AI will do all my dictation, all my notes, and I just talk to it. It'll prime me up on every counter. So I don't have to go through the chart. It'll set it up. The patient will get it in advance. They'll know what they're expected. And I just have a pleasant chat navigating their health. But we're not there yet. You're not even at the point where you get notified of your patient leaves the emergency room. And that doesn't require AI. Well, it's patchy. I do, actually, as long as it's within the system. But if it's out of our system, they leave somebody else's emergency room, you don't get notified. Yeah, well, they do have some cross-linkages, but it's not easy to use. Anyway, we don't have to go down that rabbit hole. But I mean, costed this to make... So part of the thing, and I don't know if you've looked at that Dorn Cox book on agriculture, but I thought it was quite good. And the agriculture tech stack I think is filling in quite nicely. And there's nice big chunks of it that are open source. So I don't know quite how it will play out. But there's energy into that. And it's coherent, I think. And I feel like agriculture is just one piece of landscape regeneration. And it may be the most advanced. And we want all of landscape regeneration to start to look like what agriculture looks like is my thought. So I kind of want the Dorn's book to be just not just agriculture, but to be a broader kind of living systems. Again, the organizing concept ought to be living systems, not the business of a farm. Dave, which of Dorn's books? I just put in the chat how soil works or is it the great regeneration? How soils work. I don't know if that's Dorn also, but I think it is. It's The Great Regeneration. It is that one. Okay. Cool. Yeah. Because they have the subtitles open source technology and a radical vision of hope. Yep. I put it in the chat. And he does. You know, there really is a book that like, if I ever get to write a book, I want to write that book kind of, you know, he talks about pre-competitive spaces. You could write the book about, from the, I mean, you should write the book that you wish you had written about landscape, you know, landscape. Well, in some sense, that's what this concept paper follow on is. It's just kind of taking these basic ideas and I want them on landscapes, not just agriculture. And I want to operationalize them a little bit more. I guess it's like, this is what should happen. I feel like, I feel like the stack is tactful enough that we should ought to be able to start to do something with that. And I was thinking, I was trying to, it was just daunting. I mean, it's a little bit like, you know, there's like, like creative commons, or, you know, the group of creative commons, right? Not just the licenses, but there's somebody's out there, you know, promoting and managing the licenses. And you can set up an entity, but essentially, that's trying to set out and, you know, facilitate the stack, you know, because you're negotiating. It's not, you're not going to build, nobody's going to build all stack. You're just going to try to re, you know, encourage standards and adopt enough standards and, you know, funders to commit to the idea of funding the stack and, you know, those kinds of things. I think it's more, you know, nudging the herd. Sounds like you, Dave. Well, I mean, you know, yeah, if I was, if I had enough ambition, I probably should do it myself. That wasn't so lazy. Would it, would it make sense to define the stack, but and then develop what you call it a branch in more specificity? So you have an example? I mean, I think that I was just, it's just kind of, you know, that's been one of the thoughts is that, that is, that could be an outcome. It's like, there's an organization to promote the landscape regeneration stack. And, you know, most ideas, like I was looking kind of through the stuff that who's the Jordan, Jordan's secret? Yeah. So I was looking through his wiki and stuff. And, you know, the notion is he's got a platform that he's going to build. And it does everything, you know, and I don't think those ideas work very often. So this is, this stack is not one group building this group, the point part of the point of the stack is everybody's building it, you know, from different corner and the stack is kind of much so that it enables the fact that everybody contributing into it. Jordan's actually got that vision. I'm not surprised it wouldn't come across in the writing, but he always says, you know, if it's not being built, I'll build it. But as soon as somebody comes along, it's like, oh, I'm building that part, or I'm building the other part. He's like, okay, you know, you can do it, or we can do it together or whatever. So I mean, I think one of the things is you don't actually get to decide what it's going to be you, you know, and you're building it from the inside out, right? I mean, I don't think the folks, you know, I mean, Horrible didn't know he was building Linux when he started, but Linux folks didn't know that they were going to build lamp, right? I mean, lamp didn't know, right? I mean, you know, all of this stuff, you learn it as you go downstream. But I think I'm fairly confident that in 30 years, there will be a huge body of knowledge that leads to landscape recharge. And a bunch of it's going to be codified in legal language and curriculum and software and data. And if more of that's in the comments, we prefer that. One of the really interesting things happening right now with the USDA here is the concept of urban agriculture, meaning agriculture in an abandoned city lot, right? I mean, you have places in Detroit, for example, which is a mess in many places where they are converting abandoned lots into gardens. And so USDA is making this big right now, because so many of these opportunities are in areas that are basically food deserts, because you can't put a grocery store, you know, a grocery store just gets plundered and it wouldn't. So there has to be a crowned up revival of getting these folks to be food secure. You know, currently 44 million Americans are food insecure. And a lot of them are in these food deserts and urban agriculture could be a revival mechanism. So when you look at this in terms of landscape, and this is a form of landscape design, you know, so that would be there's a huge need and demand for that part. I think that takes sort of much more of an ecological perspective. I'll just share an experience that I had here in Charlotte where I went to a registration to vote in an area that was as a poor turnout. I just thought I would go to it. And interesting enough, they had a regenerative garden that was supported by local community college. And they had people, teenage kids, learning about regenerative agriculture. It was amazing. I thought, why can't something like that scale? But coming back to a point that, you know, what I was hearing was this notion of what they, you know, again, I'm not taking, I just, you know, pick up the lingo, which is, you know, the notion of a super app. And apparently, in Asia, they're much more popular where it's an aggregation of different things. So you don't have to go to the different apps. So I don't know if there's any, you know, what your thoughts are about a super app. Elon Musk is trying to turn Twitter into WeChat, basically, because everybody in the West is jealous of WeChat, within which you can live your entire life. As long as you don't mind the PLA and the CCP snooping on your behaviors. But you can book a dog groomer, you can pay the dog groomer, you can take pictures of the dog groomer, you can review the dog groomer, your friends can see all of that and then book the dog groomer. Everything can work within WeChat. And I think Zuckerberg and Musk and others have been like drooling over the prospect of you know, having that kind of competitiveness in our lives. Whether that's a good thing is an entirely different question. Exactly. What depends on the purpose and the ethics? Yeah, for sure. And it's probably a different layer than where I'm thinking. It's like, I don't know if I'm thinking about the right layer. But again, my, my, I think the metaphor of lego is as much more useful. We want what we're talking about are basically the bricks and maybe sets of bricks. And then you're going to build a super, right? So there's some, so what happens in the conversations I hear people talk about technology and they say, okay, well, what we want is all the people to have, you know, to be able to communicate with each other and coordinate. So therefore we're going to build Hilo. And Hilo is a user facing product I would argue. And it has a GSI, GIS component as some communications protocols and things like that. The GIS component and the communications protocols would be in the stack. And then there's somebody who does a product and they take the pieces out of the stack and they make the product and they try to sell the product. But in my mind, the user, like you can imagine that the stack is a, is a, is a ball and there's accretions, new accretions growing around it. And the accretions tend to be commercial is my bet. And they tend to be products, right? And do you want the ball to keep getting bigger, but the surface of the ball tends to be commercial? Anyway, that's how I interpret open source stuff. You don't see a lot of, you know, this open source isn't what's sold, it's what's used in the things that are sold. Or is there anything in our conversations that would lead to some sort of new book? And you mean in this kind of conversation? Yeah. Well, this any, well, this, what's triggered by this or what's being said or beyond what's being said. That's a great question. I think what the dynamic that Dave is describing and that I'm jazz-hensing and we're sort of talking about here is a dynamic that I'm hoping new books plays a role in fostering, benefiting, bringing attention to, et cetera, et cetera. Because one of the reasons for new books is to create an environment within we share what we know when we make it better over time. And open source, open content is key to that. And liberating the content is really important in that process. So there could easily be a NIO book. I mean, I can easily envision a NIO book that sort of makes these statements and makes them available in an open sourcey way and is published as a book. You mean a NIO book about a NIO book? Yeah, yeah. I met a NIO book. Exactly. Yeah, I mean, I can imagine that, I mean, if this were to start to develop, I mean, for example, a book you could probably do right now a book about the agricultural stack. Right. Here's what exists already. Here's how people are using it. Here's how you, where you find things. Yeah, I don't know. Here's a tutorial for GitHub. The AI is going to be really useful. And so I was thinking translation of the, if I could talk to an AI and interact with GitHub, I'd probably be way ahead. So I don't really understand GitHub. One of the things that kind of strikes me is that we've got a lot of architectural ideas. I'm certainly guilty of this, but not a lot of just execution horsepower. I wonder if we could find universities or even high schools where there's students looking for a project and would love a mentor to shape mentor mentors that shape some architecture. And especially the things, like Dave, it's super, or class, super inspirational hearing you guys talk about, okay, I've looked around. I've looked a lot. I've looked for decades. This is the important thing right now, right? That's something that is really hard to see when you're inside a school. And it's like, well, I don't know what's important. So it seems like there's potentially an opportunity to find some, like feet on the ground, kind of, I can put in 20 hours or 40 hours over the next semester or something. As long as you kind of tell me what's the most important thing to be doing. I had an update call with Johnny Giacomelli this morning, and we had talked a year and a few months ago, maybe a year and a half ago, and he works at MIT at the SuperMind Projects Augmented Collective Intelligence and just really just sort of interesting back and forth and interesting catching up with him like good timing. And one of his tropes is why don't we know what we know, which is a thing I love. It's a trope I love as well. And at least the conversation was sort of let down because he's done a bunch more work than I have, way more with corporates that are trying to do knowledge management and all that. And I'm going to paraphrase him badly, but basically they're not thinking out at the edge of what's possible at all. They're doing really sort of low scale pragmatic stuff, just trying to get around. And he's not even sure they're either resourced or interested in the more powerful conversation around what's possible. And possible not with the invention of brand new magic, but with the magic that's on the table right now. It's just you have to think about it and organize it differently and behave differently. And he was originally pretty enthusiastic about Microsoft's Viva, whatever it's called. Hold on a second. Viva something. Microsoft Viva topics. When it first came out, he was really excited because he thought it might do something. And then it was like, there's not much horsepower there. It doesn't do much. So I think that we're in an area that could be very juicy and fruitful. And we need to locate the orgs and the funders that really actually care about this and would like to take it someplace. And I had a conversation with Danny Hillis mid pandemic because I thought he'd be interested in OGM and all that. And we ended up, I ended up thinking like, well, the underlay project he's working on is kind of stuck on a couple technical issues. And there's a whole bunch of, there's this whole funded community that's busy working on a very particular slice of what this looks like and it's kind of a little bit stuck there. And I think that happens a lot. So then we have these open source communities like the Fediverse and IndieWeb, which we've been, IndieWeb we've referred to a bunch here, which are trying the other way of doing this, which is like, hey, we're just a bunch of people interested in this with our own little startups and are doing our own stuff, trying to collaborate our way to it. And that's sort of working, but sort of not. So I'm just puzzled about where the leverage points are that we could actually get more done, get more resources to do the things Pete's pointing to and Dave's pointing to without getting stuck on small architectural hurdles. Sorry, just to be associated. I mean, one of the things that makes me think Jerry is, and I swear we did this stuff we talked about with that, that IBM paper is still pretty useful. But it's like, it's, and maybe this is, maybe there's a book in here is like, I feel like the stuff, I listened to Zane Gill do a talk the other day about kind of collaborative, intelligency things and stuff. And a lot of her examples are the same examples we were given 15 years ago, right? You know, like Wikipedia is so cool. And Linux is so cool. And they are, they're so cool, right? And I would argue we just haven't done them very often. You know, I don't think we know how we built Wikipedia kind of and we know it exists now. So 20 years ago, it didn't exist 25 years ago, it didn't exist, right? And couldn't exist. Now it does exist, but we really still don't know why, right? And we don't know how to do it again, I would argue. And so, and so that was kind of what it was like, I was feeling I feel like a lot and this is a little bit of Doran's book, it's like, you know, he's pointing at all this cool stuff and saying, this is what we should do. And I would argue, we don't know how. And that's okay, because we haven't done it very much. You know, it was like, I was, I was talking with Mitra, the guy who used to do a lot of Gopher. And he said, you know, it's just an accident. I said, well, Penicillin was an accident the first time, you know, and sometime we got good at it, right? And so we've had the accidents, but we haven't had the good at it part, I feel. And so I do feel like, so, I mean, there is a book that starts out with all the amazing stories of open source, you know, and the value of Linux and, you know, like it must be billions and billions of dollars, right? And how the Linux foundation is much bigger, there's many more open source projects, you can see this stuff is working. And then it's got a couple of paragraphs on how it happened. And those again, but at least it's the beginning of the structure of how did we, how do we do these things and how do these business models work and how do the reinforcing cycles get started? And I don't know, I mean, are they all some grad student in a dorm or, you know, could it be more deliberate than that? I mean, you know, and like with the NSF investing money in organizations, open source ecosystems, that's a really interesting experiment, I think, right? And they're going to learn a ton about how to build open source ecosystems if they can fund a couple hundred of them. Pete, jump in. I think D, I'm sorry, Pete, I'm sorry, I have a few hands. I'm really well said, Dave. And I had to chime in a little bit, not to disagree, but I know a little bit of why we have Wikipedia. And there's a couple of different reasons I could go into. But one of the biggest ones is we had World Book Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Britannica before that. So I'm oversimplifying a little bit, but the couple of people who wanted to build an online Wikipedia, online Encyclopedia, excuse me, I can't even say Encyclopedia anymore, they were able to describe it to everybody else as, well, I'll see that thing over there. I just want the online version of it. So that's like, I don't know, 40% of it right there. So one of the challenges that we have now is that when you try to build something that hasn't existed yet, or is envisioned, but not actually made practical yet, there's a bunch of practical stuff that you have to solve to be able to put Encyclopedia Britannica together. What's the editorial voice? What goes in and what goes out of Encyclopedia Britannica? So as Wikipedia got more and more viral and more and more people were contributing to it, it was a godsend for them to be able to say, well, look over there, that's something that's been around for decades and centuries. And I want that except I want it to be different in these ways, right? Not having that touchstone, not being able to describe what you're trying to do is a real drag. It creates a lot of friction, especially on collective intelligence and collective action. Hi, Bas. Yeah, I'm just, I'm just trying to wrap my mind around where this could be going. And I mean, what I've been doing with my new book here is basically develop sort of a meta level perspective on a system. So describing and mapping food as a system and whether the core influence factors, what does it take? And I'm just now in phase two, I'm still stumbling around where we can't really change anything because the system is resistant to change and why is this and where is that? So before, before moving into very specific ideas of implementation, you know, you sort of have to lay out the map. And then you can go into, so now, so I'm sort of moving now into, okay, here are things that we can actually do. And that's already what's already out there. And that's already in debate. These seem to be the most promising ideas, you know, that that actually have a good chance to gain traction. But in order for them to gain traction, here's the infrastructure that needs to be in place. I mean, when you talk about low carbon intensity scores, well, what does that mean? Who's going to buy these products? Who's going to pay premium for it? Right. So then, and how do they get distributed? So you're looking at all these complexities. And so when so, so landscape restoration, you know, is, is a section that has, you know, very broad application. But in order to, so it needs, first of all, the definition, what we all mean by it, what's all included here. You know, what are the, what are the most obvious stumbling blocks that prevent, you know, a transition into a regenerative form of landscaping? And then which one, what's the low hanging fruit here, where if we impact it, it would really make a difference, right? Which is why I put out there the idea of urban agriculture, because that is landscaping and people get to call food, you know, while they are restoring landscapes. But there are others, obviously. So, so I just think there's a progression in thought, you know, that that needs to be mapped out, but always with the intention of where can we take this, you know, where, what I call, where's the low hanging fruit here, where we can really make an impact, and people will get it, you know, and, and, and embrace it. So there's a school program where the USDA is now, like here in Bend, the school is super active in talking about food, and they have a garden, you know, where they show kids how to grow food and where it actually, carrot actually comes out of the ground, you know, kind of thing. And, and so, so, so to, to accelerate that and blow that up and make it, make it part of our, you know, more common sense understanding of the world around us, those are things that could be really helpful. So I'm just always trying to get sort of rubber on the road, you know, how do you, how can you actually make this thing work? Love that. Brad, right. As you were talking, I was doing some searching, I sent a message to somebody a couple of months ago, I never got to reply from him, he was the Dean of Behavioral Sciences and Communication at Pfeiffer University, and I started searching around Charlotte itself, looking who, who could you potentially, you know, co-opt and one of the things that, that neat, what's needed is horsepower. What I mean by horsepower is you need a lot of young people, you know, partnering with academics, departments, you know, it could be social innovation departments, it could be social media departments, where you could maybe co-opt a few faculty or identify a few faculty members who could come to a presentation on the potential of NIO books for learning. And I mean, it could flip, I mean, having spent my career in academia, it could flip the paradigm upside down, and what he, which would be beautiful would be fun, you get academic credit for it, number one, and that can, that may take a while, but it does, it can happen. Number two, is you publish these things without having to go through publishes, because they're very expensive and it's very difficult to get, if you're not part of the university, it's very difficult to get access to a lot of publications because of the, of their payment walls. So, you know, it's a question of trying to imagine where you could potentially link up with people to create a new way of learning that would capture universities and, and even high schools for that matter. So, I'll put out a challenge and see whether other people up to it, try and identify somebody from your local community or department, whatever it is, just to see if they're interested in the idea. But before we do so, we need to have a little bit of a document saying what the potential of NIO books are to see if they might be interested in it, because you have to think about how you're going to cultivate this network of learning, and tapping into universities is a good way of doing it, if you can make the connections. All right, go ahead, Dave. Over to you. You're still muted. I was thinking, I was going back to your class around the, the, like your book and so on. So, just, I want to make sure that we're not doing the, having a language problem that around landscape, that to me, I'm using landscape like watershed or bioregion as in a large kind of spatial decision making, a spatially defined thing where you have agriculture and commerce and living at humans, human people living, right? So, it's a sufficiently complex region, hopefully defined with a living systems mentality, right? So, and so I was thinking about the book. So, like, and to me, the stack, the stack manages, I would call, I've been using the word technology, but it confuses people because they think of computers. But to me, the technology is a reusable idea, right? It's an idea we can put enough. So, your book, I would argue, is trying to describe these ideas. So, you're trying to help people think through this process. And for that book to be a technology, I have to be able to reuse your book in some sense. So, I think the AI jumps right to that, right? So, the AI is a really interesting technology for exploring your book. But you could imagine also that there's a, you know, a website that helps you go through and categorize people's statements by the spiral dynamics colors or something, right? And that's a tool that they can then use to evaluate whatever they're thinking about. And that tool could be made better, right? As you, you know, as it captures more data from how people use it, it improves, I don't know, something like that. So, the technology, it's not only is the technology can be reused, it can be improved. So, what we want is actionable stuff that we're putting into the comments that is used and then reused. And I think one of the things I don't really talk about in the paper, but I think it's probably true, is to the extent that that stuff has a regenerative flavor that leads us towards positive, positive some outcomes, leads us towards living systems outcomes has that as its intellectual design, you will tend to drive the entire system in a regenerative fashion. So, there's a, there's kind of a second level of statement under there. It's like, you know, the net, the internet has a philosophy that underlies it, right? And if you're using the internet, you're kind of buying into the philosophy to some level. I mean, people are still finding that. But, but you know, there's a, it's a pressure anyway in the system. So, we want these, these, these improved, these ideas that are being used and being improved to have a regenerist and regenerative tendency. That makes sense. So, the book then is the beginning of the process. When the ideas become reusable is when you get to the technology step. Thanks, Dave. I'm thinking sort of along the lines of what several of you have just been saying. So, I put my notes in the chat. Rick, I think we all want to change big institutions and big entities like the US and the UN and agriculture and all that. But I have this funny feeling that huge institutions are really, really hard to change every now and then they change, but, but mostly through being bludgeoned by a blunt instrument. One, one way to make institutions change is to get so many people to start doing something alternative that the institution has to shift toward the alternative or the alternative just undermines and eats the old institution. And I think it's interesting here also to see large scale historic changes and to study them for, oh, how did that happen? How did this happen? So, one of the ways that I, I think is really fun is to take the notion of bioregions or watersheds and use those as some new fake governance structure and say, hey, we're going to start behaving as if there were political boundaries or useful boundaries along watersheds. Wouldn't that be cool? We're just going to pretend. It's just a game. Don't worry about it. But we're going to create collaborations and maybe currencies and maybe other sorts of things that operate along those boundaries and let people try them out. And we're going to make really useful and usable in their Lynn Ostrom's eight points for managing commons and other kinds of ideas that can be implemented so that if you wanted to implement Ostrom rules, you could do so more easily than going and looking at looking it up and trying to read a couple of papers and building it all from scratch by yourself so that you could pick us a piece of the stack. Basically, the Ostrom principles would be an application in the stack that would influence different parts of the stack and you could sort of plug it in and implement it or instrument it the kind of the way I'm thinking about instrumenting ideas in different ways. And then some of these things would be new concepts like watershed, bioregion, commons. What are you talking about? That's excellent because the moment you get people talking about how to frame the issue differently, you're coming in orthogonally or from the side of what the institutions have been built to do that are so resistant to change that have so many special interests already on board, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So I think that's kind of doable. And then the question is, do you need to provide economic incentives? I would love to see a tax rule that says if you deplete soil organic matter, you're going to pay a large penalty. If you improve soil organic matter, you get a negative income tax. You actually get a subsidy from the government. That'd be fabulous. I'd love to see something that does that. And that is economics at work. I think a lot of people who are libertarians would be like, well, okay, that sounds like a reasonable rule. A lot of people in agriculture would be like, well, screw you, you're penalizing me for industrial farming. And I don't know how you overcome that barrier. But that's a piece of the thinking here is how do you make it really easy for them to cross the bridge? How do you make it easy for them to transition how they farm, what they do, et cetera, et cetera. All of these are really 20 problems. But that's kind of the system's theoretic piece of what I think we're all talking about is how do these things work together, and how do we do the little moving parts that are necessary for these things to work better? We'll head across. See y'all later. See you, Pete. Thank you. I think what I would like to insert now into the discussion here is that the need to consider socioeconomic realities that are also part of a watershed or a bio region. And you can't really change anything productively unless these socioeconomics are considered as part of the design. And it's really missing in most every conversation. We can talk about regenerative agriculture. And in most every conversation, there's like this pretense that we're talking about a national system or a global system. And in all reality, there are things you just can't apply to certain socioeconomic environments because each community is unique in terms of the people who are there, the power structures, the regulatory structures, all of those things play a role. And then also preferences, cultural preferences related to food, what you like to eat, and so on and so on. So to me, this is this is just a huge part of the discussion in the design of a regenerative environment. And to me, that's why I want a landscape lens. Because we're talking about regenerative ag and we're only talking about individual farms. We never get to regeneration at sufficient scale. And we're not able to do the transactions that I think Jerry's talking about. Because imply here is that there's a benefit downstream from not polluting, but the farmer doesn't get paid for that benefit. Well, what if you could actually pay? What if there was a contract or something? I don't know. So how do we open up those kinds of opportunities? But you don't have that transaction until you start to envision things in a scope that includes the resort end of the farm. And that's why Playa Viva, I think, is such a fun, fractal model because you got the resort owner at the beach and he's got a farm and he's also talking to the people way up the river. And that he's planning that whole watershed. And that's the level of planning I think we should be looking for. Kevin Jones is doing a lot of stuff like that around the Swannanoa River and near Asheville, North Carolina. So he's got feed on the ground in communities, in particular underrepresented communities, and they're doing the work. Not all consonant with what we're talking about, but it's very much real. Good stuff. Go ahead, Rick. Yeah, I just want to touch on two things. One is the pragmatics of what David was talking about. What would that look like? And the second is what are the learning systems that can actually enable that to occur more effectively over time? So you have the learning and then you have the practice. Just to return to your point about there was no way I was thinking about changing institutions. All I was thinking is developing allies, open-minded people within academic institutions across things, because over time that can incrementally lead to potential exponentials. So when I was saying that, I wasn't even thinking about that. Just to let you know. Yeah, thank you. And I think that inside of each of these institutions, these are not monolithic and there are people who are thinking ahead and there are people who are trying to change them. That's the people. How do you find those people and drag them into a conversation where they can share what they know and start to plot together? Well, I've been outreaching locally and I'm going to try a little harder and see whether... I mean, I think you just have to start to find out who's in your community, find out if somebody knows somebody. It's all through personal connections. Cold cold wind is difficult, as you well know, and see whether you can make connections that way. Because if you're not repairing the learning systems to support this, then we have to improve our learning systems as well. Right. So Rick, are you and Charlotte? Did I miss a transition here? No, no, no, no, no, no. I'm in Charlotte, North Carolina. But I thought you're normally in New York, right? No, I was in Rochester upstate. No, York. Yes, yes. Ah, okay, okay. All right. So I didn't realize you were in North Carolina. Yeah, I am indeed. Are you and Charlotte temporarily or...? Oh, no, no, no. We've moved here. We've moved here now. When did you move? Why? When did you move? Getting away from the northeast winters and grandkids here. Ah, grandkids are the great attractors. Grandkids are the great problem solver globally. I think that if we can start young, start young. If we can harness the grandparent-grandkid link for the world benefit. It's a generational one, yes. Yeah, exactly. It's a big thing. It's a generational one. Yeah, absolutely. There's a big thing there. There's a lot of power there. Mm-hmm. I call them terrorists. Like, I have three little girls. Are they close? Are they close to your class? Are they in bed? No, they're in Nashville. Oh, they are twice a year for a week. And by the time we leave, we are like done. That's great. Well, my two grandsons, by the way, are just four houses down. So we don't have the benefit of distance. Nice. You must have hit the right symbol there on your back. So in Sonoma, this does balloons. This does confetti. Okay. That's crazy. This gives you a thumbs up. No. This gives you a thumbs down. This gives you fireworks. And then my favorite, I don't think this does anything by itself, does it? No. But this gives you laser light show. Nice. Do you want me to get the special effects? How do you do it? You upgrade your macOS to Sonoma. And you must have done it because you just had, oh, do you want to do it in time? Yeah, I did. Yeah, I know, I know. So you don't know that you have any of those? Yeah, that should work. You might need to have your hands closer to your head. There you go. Done. Oh, wow. Okay. Thank you. I've seen the light. I've seen the light. I have an update pending. I should see it to Sonoma. Go now. Do not pass, go. Do not collect $200. Upgrade to Sonoma. And it shows up, it shows up by default. It's on. It's weird. And then my little, on my toolbar right now, there's a little green video icon, which now has a, it's a video icon that now has a green square around it. If you click on that, it lets you tune these things and see what the special effects are. You can also turn on a couple modes. So for example, I think mine are turned off now. So for example, studio lighting dims my background. So this is called studio light. And then portrait blurs my background. So I'm just, I'm turning portrait mode on and off. How about the middle finger effect? We have to wait for, you know, so this is when you open source it, you get. That'd be great. I don't, I don't know that does anything. But you tried the big finger. Let's give it a try. That's the wrong one. Maybe double. Yeah, double middle finger. This is the Apple. This is the same people that like won't let you say should and you text messages. Exactly. Exactly. Cool. Well, I would say next week, let's keep inspiring on how to make this thing sort of come together and be more of a thing because I, Neo books aren't there to write more books. Books are bait to get people to go under the book and participate and communicate about what we know and to make it accessible, instrumentable, useful, all that kind of stuff. More findable. And learning communities. Exactly. And part of the conceit is that if that happens well, then scientists, students, journalists, policy wonks, et cetera, will collaborate through the shared artifacts online. Exactly. So that's the goal. Okay. I don't know what Jerry, you got. I've got like a, I'm not sure it's a Neo book topic, but I've gotten a little bit inspired recently, thinking about the regeneration pollination events. So this is the speed networking where we just do one-on-one networking. And the notion was that you need a strong network and we can create this service that just networks people, right? And we'll create lots of edges. And sometimes those edges will be really valuable and sometimes they'll rot and whatever, but we're just creating edges. Yeah. And it's worked okay. We created some edges, but it's never grown much. And I think it ought to grow. And so I've been trying to think of like what it is and what it does. And so I've been trying to kind of, and then I think there are some other metaphors we've seen it, like over the internet where you're focused. I want to switch to being, from being like our events come to our regeneration pollination and switch it to being a gift to other organizations. So we're going to have lift economy and their MBA next month. And we're going to have a regeneration pollination, which is a celebration of lift economy. So we're trying to bring energy to them. And I was thinking, maybe it's a little bit like the Olympic torch where we're going to run through cities with the torch. And we're either attention as you go or something. Or anyway, I'm looking for kind of a metaphor or an explanation. Is there something in here that about, so it's not a thing in itself. It's a service to the sector. But it is collecting energy and sharing and distributing it, bringing it along and delivering and then explains something like that. So I'm getting your invites. I just don't make it to them because I've got... Well, exactly. They're usually Friday afternoons, I think. Yeah, a couple times a month. And partly I come to them because it's just speed dating. I would get to meet a couple of interesting people and that would increase the number of things I need to do because it's like, I'll follow up on that. Or, you know, and I know too many people as it is. Yeah, you're probably not the right target. Well, one of my problems is actually managing the simple requests that come in from people I've met over time who are like, hey, this is interesting. And I'm like, oh, I'm curious. I love interesting things. So I have formed too big a filter that fills my bin, but that's not important here. I think one of the interesting things would be, and this might be too much work, Dave, but if people when they meet up were to write either a testimonial for each other or a description of each other or help each other perfect their presence online, if there were some other artifact left over from regeneration pollination events, then two people met and had a nice conversation and now they know about each other, which I think is the only benefit that you're currently creating. And I'm thinking here, I'm thinking here of the map. I'm totally forgetting his name. Robert, something rather is using Kumu to do a beautiful social graph. Ben Roberts, maybe? Ben Roberts, thank you. Ben Roberts, yeah. That's where Robert came out. So Ben Roberts is using Kumu to do a social graph. If every regeneration pollination meeting resulted in a couple more nodes in Ben's social graph or the big fungus or some other place in a stand in a noble format that was easily machine readable or if those interactions resulted in each individual participating having a really great webpage that was their home, that was their profile on the web that they showed other people. Like, hey, if you want to know more about me, come here. And that page is my outward presentation of the world and it shows you my connections into whatever. I don't know what that is and I don't know how to make it such a lightweight task that everybody be happily doing it because there's so much benefit. From doing it, but because it's only, I'm going to meet, for me, because it's only, yeah, I'll meet two or three new people or I'll meet five new people, two of whom I really actually want to stay in touch with and want to follow up with. That's too low a benefit and potential cost follow up for the effort. Yeah, no, that's really easy. Well, two, maybe two things. One is that we should like do a session or something where like you and Hodgson talk about your problems or, I don't know, there must be we find a couple more of you Uber networkers because he was saying that he created GRC to handle that problem because he felt like the overhead of connecting people was too high and he was trying to figure out how to automate it. And that was like one of the things, one of his notions was the GRC standard. Well, one of the motivations for my retreats one of the motivations for my retreats was I meet a whole bunch of really smart people who were well-intentioned. I don't get to see them often and they don't get to meet each other. So let's rub them together. So in some sense, regeneration pollination is in the same exact spirit. That's interesting. Well, and so in the regeneration pollination, I guess probably isn't targeted at you, it's targeted at other people who don't have as many connections. Less networked, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. And I guess part of what I was trying for is and maybe this isn't even possible is that there is in some sense, as the, if the regeneration sector is forming, I think it is. I think there's evidence for that. Yeah. Then the network will get stronger, but we need it, you know, we want to accelerate that. And it's also, it's very confusing because there's so many words, kind of, you know, it's like people are in it and they don't know they're in it, kind of. So some of the regeneration pollinations are deliberately, you know, like, let's get people to talk to lift about their MBA program. Right. So there is kind of an introduction implicit, I think, in this. The way we're thinking, they still think it ought to be done like every major conference ought to do this, right? So that people are coming to a conference to listen to people on stage, have a chance to meet a few other folks at the conference before they go. You know, that kind of thing. And I've seen a few conferences do that reasonably well. Okay. Well, that would be. But very few. But if we could do it for all the conferences, then we continue to carry the flame through the system, I guess is, I don't know, I haven't gotten this yet, but I'm trying to figure out if there's a thing in there and how you would say it and how we would market it, I guess. Well, also, is there a persistent space where everybody can share what they're seeing and what they're knowing, which comes back to this, you know. Then you're a platform and, you know, we've avoided that. A whole bunch of questions. But then, there could be RC for regeneration pollination, sorry, RP. There could be RP Birds of a Feather sessions at each conference that's happening that's interesting. And then those people could be digesting what was interesting at the conference and feeding it back into the platform, into the network. And then everybody could vicariously benefit from everybody's participation and absorption of new ideas and new people into the network. But as it is. So what if it's not our network it's the network. We're trying to support the network. Totally. So everything I just said, think of it as just protocols where anybody else can instantiate it the way they want on their network. No problem. Oh, yeah, okay. But there isn't enough digestion and sharing of what we learn and it doesn't go into a more permanent place. One of my big beefs is that we're drowning in the infotorrent and every day somebody invents some new thing that has a channel or a torrent and there's no place to put the good stuff. And the reason for, the reason I love the brain, the reason for the big fungus is that it's a place to put the good stuff. Well, in this case, I would argue that you do it in LinkedIn. You go to LinkedIn and you connect. You meet somebody like you connect on LinkedIn. Yeah, but that's all. We're just doing a little micro-intervention. I know. I'm not trying to do a big intervention. Yeah. I don't know. I think LinkedIn is missing. And I'm a great LinkedIn. Hey, Rick. Thanks, Rick. So I didn't mean to take you guys off of this. Oh, that's okay. But I was wondering in some sense. See you next week, class. The networking effect overlaps it all kind of with what you were talking about with for the Boat Effect, I guess. Yeah. And LinkedIn is where, you know, LinkedIn kind of owns the resume and owns the business social graph, I guess. Right? Those two things it's doing really well. Then there's 100 things it's not doing well. It's kind of bludgeoning its way into being a publishing platform, even though it doesn't do that all that well. But now it's like a lot of people are writing a lot. A lot of people trust it. Yeah. You lose Twitter, you go to LinkedIn. Exactly. And it doesn't have, it's interestingly, it's avoided the problems that Facebook has and that some of the other, that Twitter has. Yeah, I don't know how. But I don't see that. I don't see how it's avoided most of the controversy of all that while it's. But I think it's very good. While it's zealously protected its social graph because they think that's the crown jewels. So it doesn't let people come in and like use that well. There's no, you know, it's weird. Yeah. Fascinating. Yeah. But thanks for reminding me of Ben Roberts. Oh, because I was asking. Yeah. Yeah. No, and I haven't seen his Kuma thing in a while. I mean, I kind of, we, one of the guys that I was doing that some of the Regeneration of Pollination Design back three years ago, what was one of the, what, you know, like our slug line is something about deep networking. Right. The fuck is deep. I don't even know what that is. And he has, he built like an air table that people were supposed to sign up to. And it was supposed to be processed. Vincent Arena has, you was using the air table and switched over to something else, bubble or something else. But he's got a catalyst, which is organizations and individuals. That's a big directory as well. And he's working with Wendy McClain, who's an OGMer. And the two of them had been doing a lot of stuff. But I don't know what, where it's at now. I haven't done that. And I think, I think Vincent likes, like Carolina, who's been doing a lot of the GRC stuff probably dating Vincent. So they were like, I don't know. It's kind of, it's like, I don't know who Vincent is, but I know Carolina pretty well, so. Yeah. Well, but the, and again, the, and I don't think I care that the information is preserved because I think the connection is what matters. If you're two people, yeah, I mean, there must be something at the margins of both of these kinds of things. Yeah. If you find the two people that you're interested in and you're a normal person, you connect with them and then you're connected with them and then. I agree with that. And I think that the volume level or the relevance level on what gets saved more permanently is really important because if somebody's just like spewing all their notes and everything they're, everything they touch, it's too much and nothing is findable. But if somebody gets good at finding the shiny nuggets that are like in the field, polishing them a tiny bit and putting them in a, in a more permanent place, I think that's really important. And it may be a test that a minority of people do, just like there's a very small number of people who actually edit Wikipedia. Like everybody uses it, very few people edit it, very few, very few. So, okay, that's great because it still creates this common asset. Yeah. Well, all right. Well, it's great to talk to you. I don't need to take care of you. Oh, we're coming out. We're heading out back to the West. We'll be in Berkeley as of December, January 1. Are you going back to the same neighborhood, same building? What are you doing? Well, I wish, you know, no, we're gonna be, we're gonna be in Berkeley. Okay. Kind of close to the field work. I'd mark everything by breweries. I'm pretty close to field works, I think. Excellent. Okay, good. Good. And well, I've extra bedrooms and stuff. So, you guys. Love that. Oh, that's great. Come step. Thank you and give plenty of my love, please. We'll do. We'll do. Thank you. Thank you. Love you. Love you. Yep.