Speaking For All Mankind

This is the workshop I attended on February 17th.  Amazing amount of great material in such a short time.  The final document (available in Word):

http://opengovdirective.pbworks.com/f/Final+Results+of+the+February+Open+Government+Directive+Workshop.doc

It’s been a while since I’ve posted on neuroscience.  Turns out understanding sarcasm requires both sides of your brain:

“Reality, in other words, is so richly complex that the brain has to process it in two different ways at the same time. We need to see the trees, but we also have to remember the forest. . . Sarcasm, of course, is a perfect example of speech that requires a contextual understanding. The only way to know if someone is being sarcastic is to look around. The incongruity isn’t in the words – it’s in the world.”

But building trust online is a different process than building trust in the face-to-face world.  Mashable has a great interview with Dr. Judy Olson on creating trust through social networking tools.  As government moves toward openness and collaboration, these can be the basis for an effective trust strategy.

The results are surprising.

Gizmodo tells you how to escape from Google.

An interesting perspective on how power is shifting from government to the people.

Four months ago, I wrote about Walter Anderson’s Reality Isn’t What It Used To Be and how it perfectly described the rise of social networking even though it was published in 1992.  Essentially, Anderson argues that technology has advanced to the point that people can construct their own reality of like-minded individuals.

Rachel Winchester updates this argument with her concept of the Metanet.  She defines it as:

“The population of the internet has hit the point where we can no longer lump everything and everyone together as ‘the Internet.’ There’s the internet of things, as more and more devices come online of their own accord, and more and more sensors are added. There’s the cloud, where data is stored and processed, there’s the commerce internet, there are the walled gardens of intranets and private instances, and there’s social media, now the main way people interact with the internet. I’m starting to call these the metanet, the macronet, the micronet, and the me net.”

On a related note, I think my last paragraph of my original posting was a bit pessimistic as I asserted that social networking will lead to more groupthink and exclusionary communities.  I still think there is a danger of groupthink but the same technologies can also make it easier for people to break from groups they no longer find useful or welcome to form their own.  A key to this is how social networking technologies make it easier to raise criticisms and objections that could prevent the formation of groupthink.  Must keep an open mind on this.

Where I was today.  Great ideas and discussions!

To paraphrase Homer Simpson’s observation about beer.  I read an interesting post about the seeming elitism of the TED Conferences and I somewhat agree with the author’s assertion:

“This is classic TED. Take an idea that has gained currency. Self-appoint some (non-genuine) champion of that idea. Change the idea subtly to align with the political preferences of the ‘elite’ audience. Then market the new version of the idea (and its new champions) as the original idea that has been and is widely accepted.”

It’s not just TED.  You see this all over the web.  A few consultants, speakers, writers, whatever get together and self-proclaim each other the elite of their field (an especially audacious example – The Digerati).  They build a website, hold online conferences, and video their talks so that the “masses” can bask in the assembled geniuses.

Sometimes, the stuff is good.  I especially enjoy the TED talks and some of the Digerati have interesting insights.  Other times, it is pure pretentious crap.  And woe be to any outsider who dares question the wisdom of this assembly of genius.

But, so what?  Before the Internet and Web 2.0, these mutual admiration societies could run a magazine or discussion salon that few others had the money or expertise to run.  Now, anyone with an online connection can become their own elite group.  Don’t like TED?  Then, build your own group of gurus.  Start a Facebook group, create a group blog, film some videos.  Gather around your friends, give each other titles, and publish your great works on Scribd.

Soon, you will be one of the elite and will have lots of fans.  And other people who can’t stand you and create their own group in response to your elitism.  Democratizing elitism through social networking.

From ProjectSteps:

“Can we or should we do it?
Will it make our situation simpler or more complex?
Will it help us to solve a problem or cause a problem?”
Should we do nothing?”