Unbound Spiral

Is it sharing or stealing? Entertainment moguls may not be able to stop Napster and Gnutella Fred Vogelstein 06/12/2000 U.S. News & World Report

The moment he laid eyes on it, Gene Kan, 23, knew he had stumbled across something big--really big. Hundreds of music tracks were coming up on his computer screen. A program called Gnutella had connected him to thousands of individual computers around the world, and now he and everyone on this spontaneously created network could search one another's files for songs.

"I realized that this wasn't about swapping MP3s [music files] but a cool new technology." It was the basis of a New Age search engine--one that wouldn't just search for music on people's computers but would hunt down anything anyone wanted to anonymously share with the outside world,”

Intel Chairman Andy Grove and Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen, the man who developed the first Web browser, think file sharing is an important trend. "The idea of file sharing is the most important development on the Web since the browser," says Andreesen. One of the problems with the recent evolution of the Internet is that it has become too centralized, he says. "It's all up to something in the middle to determine what you see. Gnutella's technology blows that up. It mirrors the original architecture of the Internet."

File-Swapping Networks and related sites:

§ Napster: (First to get big PR though www.bigredh.com and others where around earlier)
§ Gnutella: http://gnutella.wego.com
§ FreeNet:
§ Filetopia:
§ iMesh:
§ Scour:
§ CuteMX:
§ Riffshare:
§ Spinfrenzy:
§ Gigabeat:
§ Gnarly:
§ MyPlay:
§ Wrapster:

See also Viewpoint
The Digital Reckoning Listen up. The music industry is being "kidnapstered," and it's fighting mad Karl Taro Greenfeld 05/22/2000 Time Magazine Time Inc. 56

Almost any news search will bring up many listings. Most of the file-sharing sites above are linking into PR references.

FreeNet hompages at http://freenet.sourceforge.net

Freenet is a peer-to-peer network designed to allow the distribution of information over the Internet in an efficient manner, without fear of censorship. Freenet is completely decentralized, meaning that there is no person, computer, or organisation in control of Freenet or essential to its operation. This means that Freenet cannot be attacked like centralized peer-to-peer systems such as Napster. Freenet also employs intelligent routing and caching meaning that it learns to route requests more efficiently, automatically mirrors popular data, makes network flooding almost impossible, and moves data to where it is in greatest demand. All of this makes it much more efficient and scalable than systems such as Gnutella.

The original Freenet design was created by Ian Clarke as his final year project in a degree in Artificial Intelligence and Computer science at Edinburgh University, Scotland. The project was completed in June 1999 when Ian made it available on the Internet in the hope that others would see the potential in the design and use it to make Freenet a reality. The software can now be downloaded.

The FreeNet publicity pages contain a number of articles on the evolution of Freenet

April 16, 2000: Freshmeat This may no longer be available hard copy attached.
Client As Server: The New Model
An interesting article discussing distributed systems and how systems like Freenet are actually in a similar spirit to the original Internet.

Cybiko</b> – Toy or Prophesy?
For an on going update on the changing tech environment see one of the more useful e-mail discussion letters found at http://www.compaq.com/rcfoc/ and click-through to the recent issue dated 05/08/2000 on “Changing Our Internet Rules” - Yet Again. An earlier letter speculated on www.Cybiko.com and now new toys are emerging for the summer and fall

Another positing from the online converation with Terrence L. Gargiulo and Making Stories A Practical Guide for Organizational Leaders and Human Resource Specialists.

I wonder... How many of you would jump on a 747 with a pilot that had never trained in a flight simulator? We know that pilots train in simulators on the ground to better prepare themselves for eventualities and challenges that many never happen. They also train for landings at airports that will appear on their schedules in the future. Unfortunately few teams have the opportunity provided by the flight simulator.

I tend to think of scenarios as a flight simulator for management. Framed well they are hypothesis of alternate environments in which our decisions may have to play out. They do not represent the future story of the company. By windtunnelling (or testing) current strategies against a range of alternate scenarios an organization improves its potential to minimize risk. Scenarios need to be customized to context if they are to be useful.

Scenarios as a form of story-telling work because they are framed around critical uncertainties (simplistic example - boom or bust economy). By building scenarios around uncertainty we are 1)opening and focusing minds on what is both important to the issue at hand and uncertain as to outcome. 2)critical uncertainties are more likely to take us to the edge of chaos where new ideas, solutions etc are most likely to emerge. 3)Scenarios must be plausible, therefore drilling down to changes in the sytemic underpinnings is important to building understanding and retaining credibilty. In this form they provide story telling and structure that not only helps to minimize risk about the decisions we must make today, but they are used to accelerate learning. When we accept that Planning is learning, (not extrapolation)then we also embrace that it may be the only way to sustainable competitive advantage.

As an organization (like the pilot) reacts to new inputs, better questions are what sustains success. The future is inherently unpredictable. Yet with very little effort we can bring in stories from the outside - so we think better inside the box. In a networked world --- connectivity is driving this. If you are a cellular carrier you better be thinking about swarms, if you are a health provider, genetic testing is already here. If you are a cotton producer, perhaps you should look at goat silk. From time to time an organization should look at everything, a "ruthless curiosity" is healthy. If stories and hypothesis get you to where you can really "listen" then success in the marketplace is much more viable. Scenarios are just one tool for getting us

I agree Stephen with your comment to find a star to peg future stories. I've always felt that the 1 to 2 word strategic intent was the right way to go. They work when stretch is involved. Effective leaders also cut the time for delivery. A yet they are also falible. Years ago Motorola - Wireless World (It led them to Irridium!)Motorola was so focused on their story they didn't pay attention to the Nokia's etc of the world. More recently Motorola has use "Intelligence Everywhere" For my two cents another example of introverted disaster. There is no benefit for "us" in this. Many of the early ad campaigns were close to I spy.

This posting is the result of watching Poptech, finding the following blog and then subscribing to it.  That added it to my news list (which will need some editing).  Next step will be to add some navigation bars..... The post and comment....

Total Immersion in Virtual Reality and Virtual Worlds - this afternoon's program features Jordan Pollack and Bruce Damer, and apparently it's show and tell time.  Pollack shows us a gangly robot that was evolved from software trying to create something.   Damer showed us a virtual world program with weird heads that were actually controlled by real people.  I lack the skills to even attempt to explain what is happening during this session.  

[Ernest Svenson: Poptech 2002] 

Joe's piece raised great quesitons about Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence.  Clearly we need to think more about how the artificial world thinks about property.  For what are the implications when a world of replicators (like star trek) can simply pull information out of an "object"?

Found a new map on Smartmobs, the results of the Public Internet Project to log WiFi nodes across Manhattan. Also picked up in Werblog and others.

At first glance it looks like an explosion of WiFi inter-connectivity and visually we are being asked to reconsider our "traditional" mental models. However, let's also provide some perspective. MAPS are made for purposes. And this one reminds me of another island and the stories around early maps showing California as an island. At GBN we called it the Map Rap. It's a story about mental models, our assumptions and perceptions.

The learning. If you get your facts wrong, you get your maps wrong. If your map is wrong you tend to do the wrong things. Please don't get me wrong. This is a wonderful map, and interesting collaborative project. What a neat idea. Yet......

....it misses many aspects and details. This is a map that existed last fall. Maps are a wonderful naviagation tool. At issue here is how to navigate from then to the future. The answer will not be found in the map, but in the hearts and minds of those connected to the ground swell. They are not only in Manhattan, networks like these are popping up all over.

The technical forces have propelled us this far. Yet what I want is a living map, showing the conections, and exchanges at any point in time. Though is this enough? I'd suggest this is just another signal in the tsunami of change. If you are tel co, an info provider, etc. I hope you are way beyond this map testing alternate environments in which your decisions play out. If a completely devolved decentralized mass provided impersonal collaborative network is not part of your thoughts, then consider testing your strategies against it. Don't just think about sytems. Think about social structures. From communications to accounting and marketing! etc.

Then... what might tickle a real explosion?

It also poses antoher question. As a company, have you done enough future thinking? Now what are all those wireless networking companies doing about their brands?

John Petersen at the Arlington Institute wants more subscribers. His newsetter FUTURE EDITION is published bi-weekly. It "explores a cross-disciplinary palette of issues, from the frontiers of science and technology to major developments in mass media, geopolitics, the environment, and social perspectives." To subscribe

From Dan Pink The biggest story you missed . . . if you're into publishing, Costco, or waffle wedges.

From Steven Zeitchick's excellent piece in yesterday's Publishers Weeklys NewsLine: "Over the last decade Costco's influence on the book trade has grown extraordinarily, with the company leading a segment that is now responsible for nearly 10% of sales.

"But starting soon, the retailer will try on a new hat -- as a publisher.

Today I had a motivating coffee with a close friend. Much of our early conversation was about SMART MOBS the book. Both of us really itching to push boudaries and take product and service concepts concepts well beyond the boundaries outlined in the book; to give SMART MOBS a business building edge.

Then it is not unusual for Tom and I to reflect on stories, the scenarios we write and exploring different concepts as we go. It's an update. We are both passionate about the challenges of the future. Then we discover some fragment or item we have never shared, playing with some new concept and model. Today one emerged as I was hunting for yet another example of how the blogging / publishing community might revolutionize the customer service business.

ANTIPORT traces to 1999. I remember writing it - sort of pounded it out. It was meant to fly in the face of today's customer service practices. Antiport suggests that smart mobs can run customer feedback systems. What's more perhaps today with a more object oriented web the costs and programs maybe ready to enable it!

I beleive it was brash and bold then. From marketing PR to seeding a community for customer feedback. Let me know what you think. I'll be watching to see if anyone registers www.antiport.com this time round.

Imagine: January 21, 2003 (updated) News headlines around the world…...
Antiport Flys New Format for Landing Consumer Feedback
Today the largest mass registration in the history of Internet names took place. The top 10000 companies worldwide have a new conscience. Today, Antiport.com spent $1m and registered 10000 urls including antiibm.com, antitoyota.com, antige.com, anti….anything important…and they plan on making a new business out of customer complaints. What’s more they are giving the business away!

Marketplace for Customer Feedback
So how does it work? Antiport is a new marketplace, the market for customer feedback. Antiport began by giving away 10000 opportunities to take over the customer feedback function for the largest companies on earth. Each antisite will run a similar franchised feedback model capturing and reporting on key customer feedback. The antisite will pay five percent of all revenue received to Antiport. Antisites are all employee owned and gain shares and vest over three years in the Antiport based on the volume of organizational and community feedback they support. As this feedback network grows, so will the value of Antiport shares. Antiport appears to have adopted the successful SAIC ownership model. Potentially anyone can register an unregistered anti-site and working to the open standards gain approval and membership. This may become the ultimate recruit yourself business.

Handling the complaint virus!
But it doesn’t stop there. Antiport is simply anti bad services and products. And the best remedy isn’t just forgetting about it but making problems transparent. When you register a complaint with the relevant antisite, as a consumer you get some additional choices; you can share it with a “pass this one on” list of your friends or contacts, you can also add to that the “activist list” automatically forwarding your complaint / request to a random sample of interested parties. Then there is the follow-up list. Having put in a complaint you can follow similar items, etc. Each one provides metrics, and a call back to the community for discussion and remedies. This is because the founders believe that these “cold viruses” will make poor performance transparent. As consumers we can expect better responses. Companies that fail to respond will probably end up on the anti-port black list. Now would you buy a product from one of those? It’s rumored that deals with bizrate, epinions, revbox and dealtime are also pending.

Lower Costs, Improved value creation
With the announcement 25 fortune 500 companies announced from today that their feedback functions were outsourced to these new antisite consumer communities. In reality their customer service departments just started their own businesses. Long term the new services are expected to provide customer feedback for a lower cost. So now, for the first time those receiving the complaint will have ownership in running it down and reporting on it and getting a remedy. Now that’s a lot better than just $10.00 per hour. More importantly Antiport just redefined their job. They are no longer there to hide company problems (How much sooner could we have learned about explorer tires?) but to benefit each of us. No wonder we will leave them a tip --- and that’s different! What happens when it is a pleasure to make a complaint? Now, just think how their shares of the most valuable information on earth will appreciate as consumers adopt this simple new approach. We expect Antiport to be come the news portal for all major consumer complaints.

Antisites all agree to provide for the customer information they collect to their originator for free (eg antiibm.com to ibm.com). Additional customized data required by the company will be completed by Antisite customers at current costs. Additional revenue comes from selling the information to competitors, selling advertising for competitive products, a commission on legal remedies, and running new industry community feedback groups.

For the community too
For smaller companies there are even bigger benefits. A number of groups are registering anti-sites for a collection of local community businesses. For example three people expect to handle all consumer complaints for the businesses in the town of Lafayette California. They are just using the same infrastructure the larger companies use, but there are some twists too. They are providing a follow-up sales service to local contractors, so feedback on their performance is captured. It’s rumored that the best community in the US award will be announced starting in 2005. What’s more it is tied in with scorecard.org.

Of course it won’t be easy for them to get off the ground. But if you interested and you’ve got a company you think need reforming you best get acquainted with Antiport. The educational materials, on-line training and control systems are all there for you to get qualified and started. Register and hold your Antisite today!

Antiporters will also participate in an audit system exchange, thus learning from other industries and other problem solving situations. Thus at it’s core it provides a Peer to Peer model of learning and collaboration. Interestingly, it may well be the first business that requires no offices anywhere! The core web system is completely web enabled, reducing communications costs.

The antisite approach is currently available in 13 languages and confirmed operable in 56 countries.

Objective:
Marketplace for Customer Feedback

Benefits:
Centralized feedback market, - one number- guaranteed follow-up
Distributed Structure Distributed scalability
Transparency - Viral – rapid visibility,
Ownership structure owned by knowledge workers directly involved
Marketplace speeds learnings and provides new opportunities for solutions / community
Industry groups possible – shared learning and new standards
New panels possible

As consumers:
Feedback is used not buried, more likely to improve products and services.
Enable the powerful telling of real stories.
Viral structure will take “bad” feedback to a new level!
Creating a consumer conscience!

Today's post reviews SMART MOBS by Howard Rheingold who many have admired for his passion and thinking development around communities. SMART MOBS recognizes and captures a new paradigm. As he says "....a technology that is going to change my life in ways I can scarcely imagine..." Ultimately that is my real bone of contention with this book.

It's unfinished. We must collaborate on dreams to seed tomorrow's solutions.

My attraction to SMART MOBS was the language that enables swarms to emerge from science and appear in our daily lives. The theories aren’t really new and neither are the observations, which never break any new ground. It is a masterful collection of sources capable of leading you on a merry journey. Yet someone not already partially aware may find it tedious, for within a descriptive prose it fails to uncover real dreams for tomorrow. As a result it won’t create many inspiring new options for you. It may stimulate further inquiry. It is timely and yet primarily observational tracing to Howard Rheingold’s 2001 journey of discovery.

If you are new to Napster, SMS and Seti, or books by Kurzwiel or Mann and don’t know what 802.11b is, then this book may provide plenty to think about. Did I mention Lessig, Winer and Searles, or Seattle, participation on eBay, surveillance? The list could go on.

This book is exploratory not prescriptive. Not all the facts and observations are likely to be correct. It fails to address questions that CEO’s marketers and strategists should ask about a SMART MOB world. If you send it to your CEO friend (not HP, Motorola, Sony IBM etc. who better be very familiar with the concepts) for Christmas make sure you make it your job to get them thinking constructively beyond this book. Sell them a Learning Journey; collapse Howard’s travels over two years into two days. Then help them create. Here there is not enough to move the majority of businesses forward. If you see possible impacts on your business the challenge will be to create a dream and road map for action. For CEO’s it fails to conceptualize how smart mobs will affect the business model. Or how will money be made in a world like this? What does marketing mean in a smart mob world?

So let’s give FIVE STARS for those that need SMART MOBS as a wake-up call, and realize that the book is out of date. I believe much is inevitable. Hidden within are market-changing concepts and ideas. Believe and you will ultimately need to rethink everything regardless of market and industry, from Inventory to customer complaints.

Smart Mobs covers a lot of ground. Some like music sharing or texting we take for granted now. Not all of it exists on our doorsteps. The changes are global and local. However the emergence and impact can’t be confined to your business, market or learning environment. The challenge is also personal. I wish HR had spelled it out more boldly. You will need to take a stand. A revolution is in the making. It will tip the whole system, as we know it. Think about your position on intellectual property, digital exchanges. How should wireless spectrum be regulated? What is the future of publishing? Are you managing your reputation? Where do you place your bets and investments? How should learning and education change? Will this affect my government? Etc.

If you have views on these things and need examples, use this book. Don’t wait for a follow-up edition. Share your motivation to learn and swarm on curiosity seeking answers collaboratively in real-time. For the next hit about SMART MOBS won’t be written by an individual. It will emerge collectively perhaps bloggedly with many faces, contributing. Despite today’s uncertainty the web is already a better place to learn, experiment and prototype these things. Resorting to a book is catch-up! There are daily blogs that provide more up to date perspectives. The supportive SMART MOBS blog tries to step into real time. It has a nice focus. It has a theme to clip around. Absorb the postings and you will probably be on your way.

My largest learning’s in the book came from the link made to Steve Mann and CYBORG. Again this is not news. Mann has been a roving CYBORG for twenty years. His experience shows there is a problem in the language. The link that Howard makes bringing Cyborgs into this picture was interesting to me. His quoting of Mann was worth reading the book for: “The smart room is a retrograde concept that empowers the structure over the individual, imbuing our houses, streets and public spaces with the right to constantly observe and monitor us for the purported benefit of ensuring we are never uncomfortable or forced to get up from the armchair to switch on a lamp…” Naturally Mann’s research is working to foster independence using wearable computers. Bring it back to today. Now look at networking your house. Will you wire it? Or simply go wireless? Wireless is already winning on cost!

For those that know how technologies trickle down and where to look, Smart Mobs gives great examples out of DARPA. (Mesh networks and more.) When our kids and soldiers operate this way. Take notice. The book may also help you understand quickly why the regulations around wireless and selling bandwidth have been a mistake. We now have incumbents with enormous investments trying to protect and maintain a system that is no longer effective. Change the way Wireless is regulated or simply watch it overturned by consumers.

I am not raving madly about this book for I’d like a stronger conclusion. I really believe Howard is on the side of decentralization, collaborative communities, protecting the innovation commons and thinking about governing in a world of SMART MOBS. SMART MOBS is simply another name for communities of consumers (COMSUMERS) empowered and collaborating to accelerate the use of their information assets. Are costs for moving to unbound systems rapidly dropping? SMART MONEY will be on invisibly aggregating these new markets while consumers stay in control.

There is a thread. Not one I found blaring out in the book. SMART MOBS accelerate learning. Whether you are part of a music sharing community, fighting on a battlefield, a human cyborg, all are part of collaborative SMART MOBS prototyping real-time solutions. They are more open source by nature. The thread is there. Napster hot lists and the emergent subscription communities around blogging for example.

Despite underscoring SMART MOBS as the next social revolution there is little clarity on when the revolution will tip. What is the tipping point? As examples from Philippines to Seattle show, systems can tip in just a few days. There is an inherent suggestion that systems around wireless may tip and become P2P based. I remember writing such a Scenario a couple of years ago. As we wrote it CYBIKO was announced (another example in the book) which added credibility to our scenario. That stimulated a financial discussion (the book lacks any financial insight about tipping points). How close is it? That will be for you the reader to guesstimate.

This decade will continue to challenge us all. The way we live, collaborate, and connect though communities that swarm, sometimes for seconds and others towards eternity. Smart Mobs goes beyond just applying Moore’s, Reid’s, and Metcalf’s laws and yet never really brings urgency to the challenges that face us. As a business you cannot afford to wait!

Charles Handy is one of the really primo strategy thinkers. The thread I picked up on was how top managers - manage - and yet fail to have the skills to look beyond. The classic solution is to bring in consultants - outside perspective -. Great we all need it. AND I WOULD NOT TURN AWAY ADDITIONAL WORK!

Then I open Fast Company. I always read Gary Hamel "Now's the Time to Change the Game" and think. My offering has to be better than his! In the FC article I see similar words around the Handy dilemma, reading as he introduces learning journeys and the need to inspire "viscerally" led solutions from within! So I will take his advice from the article to heart! His advice! My response! Flippant comments!

1>>> Radical innovators challenge the dogmas and the orthodoxies of the incumbents. The first thing the CEO should challenge is his strategist and outside advisors! Ask them how do we create tomorrow's strategies today? Ask yourself --- What dogma does this strategist carry? How orthodox are his perscriptions? What strategic business model does he or his organization use? Then get rid of every "strategy" provider that isn't network and community centric. For the first rule is. Go fishing where the others are not fishing! Don't let Strategos, McKinsey, BCG etc near your business for insights. Insights come when your whole community (customers, employees, partners, shareholders, other stakeholers, etc) accelerates learning. Then search out individuals with dreams to help you make change using methods that inspire from the ground up. Make sure they come with an offer that includes a free beta testing capability worth 20 -200 times what you are paying them! Cause then you know you will be getting leverage! As an individual I can give you 20 times now tracing to my network and affiliations. Then wrap this in to a community and grow the organism.

2>>> Radical Innovators spot the trends the are already changing but have gone unnoticed. Well we followed his first rule in one above (look where your competitors aren't). Sorry real radical innovation is in sythesizing disparate threads find collaboratively creative solutions at friction points. Spotting suggests someone is a watcher. Collaboration suggests methods within your community that accelerate the emergence of new concepts that lead to action. Your role is to create compelling friction points that give your community "an innovation voice"! Of course in this section he really pisses me off. "I'm not a big fan of ...... scenario planning, because I don't believe that you can predict the future." Scenario planning is not about predicting the future! Scenarios are about synthesizing new threads, discovering potential, accelerating learning, asking better questions, often in real-time, yes testing hypotheses to creat alternate environments in which we MAY have to execute our decisions. I think Gary's problem is not knowing how to create relevant context for scenarios with participants. THEY are NOT PREDICTIONS! Merely a tool to help answer the unaswerable.... until you know, really know.... What must we collectively do next?

3>>> Radical innovators learn to live inside the customer's skins. Looks good doesn't it. In fact I'd trace my most successful marketing programs to just this statement and the need to go after unarticulated needs. So what's the problem? It's a given. In our world of radical strategy, accepting the above is to accept the industrial paradigm. It suggests we... the organization are providers of value rather than the co-creators in value. The emergent exchanges that create real value are multivariate experiences. The current renewed passion for deep ethnographic reseach is a result of the dash amongst large corporates for the "unarticulated need". I admit I've seen some fantastic stuff as a result. So while I am finding it difficult to frame my complete objection here. I have a suspicion that these current passions are microed into the shower or bath, when perhaps the real elements that will reframe them are a paradigm shift away. Mentally, although not in time. Now if you have read my posts whether on swarms, smart mobs, or COMsumers you will see an underlying belief that collaborative responsive highly connective networks are important to framing the fullfillment of unarticulated needs. So as a strategy organization we should start thinking much more systemically about how to respond. For me the experience is enhanced when everyone is a customer and th community is the brand and vice versa.

4>>> Radical Innovators think of their companies as portfolios of assets and competencies. There is a fundamental assumption here. It is that the company controls assets that actually make a difference. (Brand, customer relationships, databases etc noted) These are fundamentally information assets and increasingly valueless when held by companies and not within markets. SMART MOBS can take this asset away or make it transportable and mulitply them 1000 fold. The radical innovative leaders for tomorrow won't think of themselves as managing organizations but facilitating markets - value creation across markets / networks. And here we seemingly have a dilemma, and a real challenge. For networks aren't more effective when they compete. They require collaborative skills.

Then the closing --- guess what? He promotes "Wisdom in markets" markets with peer review and alternate forms of funding. However I struggle with the suggestion that "The goal is to build systems (Internal) that mimic the marketplace, where ideas, talent, and capital can find one another quickly." This sounds like consultant speak for spend lot's of money. Guess that is the problem. There are not many companies out there that would live in an open source world or provide that degree of transparency with their customers. When you spend your money. Remember you are not really after an innovation system. What you want is to be the leader of and in healthy markets! At the moment beyond eBay I can't think of many. Like Gary I believe you need an effective migration path and a systematic approach customised to context. Then like me. Test what he is telling you. Is it radical enough? Then cut his budget by 20%, offer us 10% and pocket the rest! You need some heretics on board!

Ah it's old: A para from The COMsumer Manifesto. "As information transfers to COMsumers, organizations are thrown back into the world of goods and services. Information will no longer be a scarcity around which organizations compete. This is a world where information is freely available or priced at fair market rates. Businesses will no longer be able to maximize their profits by mining the closed, proprietary data mines they have accumulated. This is a world where information is freely available or priced at fair market value rates. Thus organizations will find themselves with new product and service development demands. The challenge for organizations will be to look to other scarcities that help to develop the value of their products and sustain their position."

As a final note and thanks to Gary for stimulating my thinking - one of my favorite stategy quotes from him is: "Great strategy is always subversive!" Without "Competing for the Future" other books and all the HBR articles my life would have taken a very different path!

The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution is an article by Microsoft employees posted at Stanford University. They describe the darknet as the collection of technologies used to share digital content including hardware (DVD Burners), software (Kazaa, Napster) and the objects that are traded (music, films etc.)

Their conclusion:
"We speculate that there will be short-term impediments to the effectiveness of the darknet as a distribution mechanism, but ultimately the darknet-genie will not be put back into the bottle."

More importantly they had a few words for business and marketing strategy.

".... probably make more money by selling unprotected objects than protected objects. In short, if you are competing with the darknet, you must compete on the darknet’s own terms: that is convenience and low cost rather than additional security."

So in other words... in the minds of Microsoft's thinkers it is a foregone conclusion that the trading of digital product (music, cd's etc.) will be enabled by darknet technologies. Nothing really new here. So what is the recording industry to do? First follow the advise of many. Provide me with an experience!

Now using the music industry as an example and simply trying to be provactive, with thoughts of Smart Mobs, COMsumers etc in the back of my mind.

Economics limited the size of personal music collections. I could never before afford every piece of music on earth. Now I can. It's almost free! However, I have no idea what to look for. I also bet there are many more "stars" out there who are not managed because they didn't package into a record store. So expand the number of artists you market, and then market them to me, locally as well! I'm sure music is played in public venues in the Bay Area! I suspect the challenge for RIAA members is to become a lot more efficient at becoming a ubiquitous agent.

Technology has enabled me to play progams in many locales. I'm no longer confined to a plug or affected by environmental conditions. My music consumption by time is increasing. So how fast can you grow my music interest and music conversation? Make it even more attactive to live my life with music. Can you make my music profile go anywhere? Can it swarm with people in a street fair? I think you better take my darknet sharing wireless!

As an industry you segment me rather than link me. You seek to profile me rather than find my peers. I'm guessing there is real utility value in linking hotlists. I believe that and some slick metrics / indicators would subtly accelerate my learning and your learning about me. Hey you can have the information if I get some better utility for it. Afterall on Kazaa I already give it away. What might that be? Try changing the experiece of a dinner party - invisibly without effort?

Of course the music industry thinks they are limited to music. In fact this industry is the benefactors of a completely new channel. This is like waking up and realising you could be the next WalMart. A channel where consumers are comfortable sharing their music lists. Can you not ask yourself what else we consumers might be willing to share. Here you are an industry that knows how to write contracts! Negotiate good prices and secure a profit for yourselves and your artists. Hey can you link me, my interests and make some slick purchase recomendations on my part? Perhaps (given the number of us playing the music) you could do some buying for us. Might just be a margin in it.

Easier? We play more data records with more connection points per day than we will every play music. Perhaps you might like to think about books rather than my groceries or insurance at first. Amazon is nice and yet they will never understand what I read or the reviews I should be seeing. (like blogs I'd like sent to me.) Why don't you put your minds to it. Afterall I know what I play. Just not prepared to put the effort into list sharing. Can't you use the same principles with my peers to create and enhance my reading experience?

Of course dear RIAA you thought I was done. I'm not. To build your reputation you must build the reputation of our community, our data sharing community. You need to work on trust and building in the right levels of privacy. I really doubt you can do it. Afterall it requires leadership by example. With your threats I've learned to despise and distrust you. Clearly you can't control it. HOWEVER YOU CAN FACILITATE IT! Your goal is to set in play a market for digital information sharing. Call it eBaycubed for the prototype. Get the idea?

It would seem the elements for a recipe are obvious. All that is left to do is cook up a migration path. Weathly magnates, show me the customer that you really have our music interests at heart! Build a community for all of us around our digital rights!

All of us, at one time or another, have wondered what the future will be like? Dreamt the odd imaginary life and asked what sort of world will our children to live in? As corporate leaders there is pressure and desire make the world a better place? However, short-termism often gets in the way of exploring better ways of getting to the future. While we rush to INNOVATE - INNOVATE we still require frameworks for testing BETTER IDEAS! How often do we consider the forces of change that might light a long-term fuse, --- create new options and ultimately help us frame that better more robust path forward?

This is a post mulling over long-term changes and whether earlier thinking about Smart Mobs had appeared in Global Scenarios. I just briefly looked again at "The Millennium Project" from 1999. It's a normative scenario and way out there 2050, so we don't benefit from an alternate view or obvious critical uncertainties. I just scanned it for threads around innovation, invisible tech, smart mobs etc. My interpretation is that our emerging "digital commons?" is encapsulated in the cyber brain concept, which appeared to emerge without wars over IP, DRM etc. Could it be the Millennium scenario assumed that "information wants to be free"?

Relating Global Scenarios to Smart Mobs; will the underpinnings that link the interests of organizations and govenments survive?

Global Scenarios are developed to go beyond regional or business boundaries. They are really attempts to think at higher levels of abstraction. They usually deal with global scale developments often providing useful background summarizing research and findings that enable smaller organizations to relate to these issues. An organization can then nest their scenarios in a way that enables a panorama style view. Dependent on an organizations / industry development there may be parallels. As an organization progresses this might increase the level of confidence amongst decision-makers. Regardless the idea is to provide people with images that make them think and learn. Having strong Global Scenarios out there helps us think.

So recent Smart Mobs discussion points piqued my curiosity. If I search Google for Global Scenarios, how many will address "Smart Mob" type issues? How many links will provide thoughts and frameworks for the next stage of this technical revolution? On searching I can find smart dust, pervasive computing, and yet I think our probing finds Smart Mob threads sadly missing. At a time when technology is accelerating is it possible that we need some new "global scenarios" that more effectively deal with the emergent challenges to "identity", the digital commons, nano-dust, etc.?

An older article may help to provide some additional context. In 1995 Wired "How to Build Scenarios" asks the question "What will be the general tenor of commercial life on a global scale in the year 2020?" This article was not about predicting the future or specific event, but to highlight large-scale forces that impact on the world we will live in tomorrow. The scenario matrix is still interesting today, though we may fill in some of the blanks differently.

Quoting from the article: "The first axis of uncertainty is the character of our desire, an "I" or "We," individual or community. This uncertainty about the quality of our individual hopes and intentions cuts at the most fundamental level: Will the energy of democratization and the ascendance of the ultimate individualized "I" continue to prevail? Or will our social organization and self-definition be rooted in a group - a nation, a tribe, a collection of users of a particular brand, a more communitarian "We"? The I or the We will never disappear, but which will come to be the prevailing influence in our culture? It could go either way, and with a bang; that is the uncertainty."

The second (vertical) axis shows the uncertain character of social structure: Will society be a center that holds and provides stability, or will it fragment? Here, we stake out the extreme possibilities of social organization: Will social and political structures (either new or traditional) provide a society wide coherence and order? Or will society shatter into shards, the jagged edges of which do not mesh into a coherent whole? Will there be a state to impose order, level the playing field, and unify a commonwealth? Or, will permanent fragmentation, increasing plurality, and unfettered free-marketism bring us to "bottom-up" functioning anarchy? Our second uncertainty might seem at first blush an outcome of the first. But in fact, while they're related, they're separately uncertain. Indeed, it's precisely the way they're intertwined that makes them interesting by giving us four scenarios, four very different "future spaces" to explore.

Now I know scenarios have been written (some with/by my clients) that included "smart mob" type consumer environments and radically changed information asymmetries. Yet my quick brush looking for updated Global Scenarios doesn't bring this social information revolution to the fore. In fact there are few scenarios around that contrast the changing digital commons. Lawrence Lessig has spoken at length about the innovation commons. In other threads the 'war on terrorism" is perhaps masquerading while serving a darker purpose.

Please judge for yourself. The question I am asking myself is. Are the premises that have effectively linked organizations and our governments for the last 200 years likely to be broken by Smart Mobs? I'd certainly like to see some global scenarios that deal the future for innovation, the exchange of cooperation, identity and community values.

Have you seen any? Can you provide any links? Without them, organizations and government may not change fast enough. As institutions they have served us well. Are we certain they will serve us as well for tomorrow or how must they change? Perhaps there are other ways forward? This area for dialogue can be made more compelling and build a conversation with a broader audience. I’d love to see some new global scenarios do just that. Of course even better would be to run such a project

Michael Crichton has done it again. Written a book that will make a powerful screen play and a great movie. I was attracted to Prey as soon as I heard that this nano - machines exploration was released. It's a quick read, a tale greed and scientific disregard. Prey is composed of nano-particles, acting intelligently, learning from the environment. They are growing exponetially more dangerous. The story and characters remain fictitious. Yet Crichton's descriptions of swarms, flocking, and complexity brings the convergence of biotechnology, computing, and nano-technology into our lives in a way that will make you think. Let's hope this is not the future we pray for! Let's hope the likely movie follow-up makes sure of it!

Don't discard this from your realm of future possibilities.

Kevin Werbach is one of the organizers of Supernova to be held December 9-10, 2002 in Palo Alto, CA. Their description.

Supernova is a new conference exploring the distributed future. With the bursting of the Internet bubble, businesses, end-users, investors, and technology vendors face a bewildering array of challenges. Yet a common theme runs through the fundamental questions facing software, communications, and media. That theme is decentralization.

Intelligence is moving to the edges, through networked computers, empowered users, shifting partnerships, fluid digital content, distributed work teams, and powerful communications devices. Each industry sees only a small piece of the picture. Supernova is the first event to bring these threads together. Those who understand the business opportunities, technical underpinnings, and policy implications of decentralization will have a competitive advantage in any economy.

Some real interesting thinkers. Wish I was going. May provide an interesting update to the P2P conferences I've attended in the last few years. Be a shame if it runs short on attendees. It is still hard to mainstream this message, particularly to marketers. For ultimately this turns the marketing world upside down. A decentralized infrastructure will change consumer interests in information. Perhaps Supernova will help uncover the stories that accelerate change.

If you are looking for more examples of "decentralization" read Kevin's short October paper

<b><a href="http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2002/12/11/piracy.html">Tim O'Reilly </a></b>has put together a very thoughtful article on file sharing, digital rights and managing digital content distribution channels for the future.

What was the best idea of the year, and how did it change your life? Check out the NY Times Year in Ideas Mine was going blogging, then that is not an idea it is following a movement. So too are some of suggestions from Smart Mobs to Enhanced Clothing. Still enjoy and think about the innovators behind it. Success may remain beyond these illustrations and yet our interest in Success and "New Thought" began a long time ago.

"But how shall I get ideas? ‘Keep your wits open! Observe! Observe! Study! Study! But above all, Think! Think!’ And when a noble image is indelibly impressed upon the mind -- Act!"

“All who have accomplished great things have had a great aim, have fixed their gaze on a goal which was high, one which sometimes seemed impossible.”

-- Orison Swett Marden (1850-1924), founder of Success Magazine - and part of history and old new thoughts.

There is a Serious Play forum on now at Group Jazz Chautauqua with Lisa Kimball and Susan Doherty. Open registrations. Howard Rheingold will be participating there in January on Smart Mobs. See their program. These tend to be interesting discussions. Get on their list. You may want to wade in from time to time.

Current topic Lego Serious Play with Jody Lentz emerges from a practical strategy application using Lego and an "imagination play" metaphor. It also reminds me of the book with a similar name by Michael Schrage which I really enjoyed.
The book has a simple premise. What type of culture are you. A spec to prototype culture or prototype to spec culture. Critical to this is modeling. beta testing etc. The later suggests faster learning, more muddling though. Stories, illustrations, models are all important here. At time there must be rules and other times no rules. I'm sure the structure of the Lego product can be made to work both ways in reality. Go try cyber building with it! Ultimately, "bricks" may help with strategy, but nothing replaces excellent tools for the mind... including great facilitation, context and the excitment and enthusiam of dealing with complexity.

Wonderful to find Stacy's Agreement / Uncertainty matrix presented so well. Found via John Keldon at Sign of Knowledge. His link to Plexus Institute finds many interesting links.

As I blog... I'm far from certainty and similarly perhaps far from agreement... thus with inconsistency I can continue "muddling though" searching for the creative zone while following the fashion for - self expression.

Technology Review - December 4, 2002

As Gerd Kortuem, an assistant professor at Lancaster University in England, sees it, the crowds who surround us every day constitute a huge waste of social capital. If you live in a city for instance, there are many who pass within a few yards of you each day who could give you a ride home, buy an item you're trying to sell, or consider you as dating material. Dynamic networking makes it possible to tap those resources through a momentary alliance among transient interest groups. But in a world of wireless wearables, computers embedded in clothing could form networks on the fly, prompting software agents to carry out mutually beneficial transactions

Following the Lego post yesterday I'll state that companies don't need "Lego Serious Play". What they need is great strategic facilitation.

3d modelling is neat, draw out of it real-time stories and that's better still. Lego is a prop - a tool for illiciting the stories. The strategies emerge from the discussion, the search for clarity, common understandings. For my two cents, it's too easy to draw the wrong conclusions from Lego models. Lego is simply too structured. Better to use clay, more mouldable, messy, more suitable to complex ideas, more intuitive, and tactile to boot. So if Lego Serious Play is really encourages us to think with our hands. Then follow it with a more maleable tool kit. Tools don't make strategies --- people do!

This example was facilitated by a friend of mine. Now think Lego. Which will provide more emergent insight?

After receiving a few comments privately I felt roughed up for slashing (could have put it better) at Gary Hamel's recent article in Fast Company. I still believe it was basically on target. So naturally I been following other postings. Here's some snips;

Sudar Dasai says (my bolding):

"Innovative, breakthrough, radical ideas - those that occur at the fringes, happen through processes of interaction among a wide variety of employees, not constrained to fit within boxes. The process of tolerating this 'Variety', of deliberately creating it and nurturing it, is something we have not been successful at implementing. We have not learned how to create the kinds of environments where this kind of innovation becomes systemic.

To suggest that there is a cookbook, a set of formulas, a checklist of things to do, is to go back to a prescription that has not worked for the last several decades. The innovation we now need is not just in the techniques of Product Development, Marketing or Strategy - It is in finding the courage to simultaneously create exciting communities of innovative people, those fringes of excitement within our organizations that we so want to serve in the outside world."

Then Hal Richman added his thoughts about scenarios too.

"Hamel's portrayal of scenario planning as predicting the future - it is really about understanding plausible futures. Hamel's quest for "What are the things that are already changing that most people ( especially my competitors ) haven't noticed yet?" is addressed by the driving forces that are part of any scenario planning exercise."

Did I see in these sandboxes and stories? Heretics and values? Scenarios and communities?

I've been listening to Tom's search for heritics recently and was reminded about the stamp story and the origins of the postage invented in Britain in 1840. Postage created new industries, including advertising and rapidly accelerated literacy rates. The parallels are important today, for e-mail, spam, and digital identity.

The printing and publishing industry of the time was caught up in the 'Industrial Revolution', benefiting from changes in manufacturing and exploiting developments in other network technologies - railways and telegraph.

Stamps were a reformers idea. Rowland Hill wrote"Postal Reform; its Importance and Practibilitiy" in 1837. The plan introduced stamps and uniform low rates, which made it universally affordable. It also dramatically cut the accounting costs of the Royal Mail who up and till then logged each individual letter. Let's be clear. Up until 1840 the "receiver" paid. After 1840 the "sender" paid. Until 1840 the system was high cost, with frauds on it common.

Within a few years the stamp revolution spread around the world. For additional statistics see The Economic and Social Background to Victorian Print Culture

Today 163 years (May 2003) later the postal revolution has peaked. The efficiencies driven to a point where AOL can create metal non-recyclable CD sign-up trash and still make a business case for putting it in my mailbox. An with e-mail yep we have improved the immediacy of the delivery and reduced the costs. And behold.... just like pre 1840 the receiver pays, the system is increasingly spamed and fraud is more rampant.

What was the platform they launched the penny post on? "Mothers and fathers who wish to have news of your absent children; Friends who are separated and wish to write to each other; Emigrants who do not want to forget your motherland; Farmers who want to know the best place to sell your produce; Workers and labourers who want to find the best work and the highest wages" to support their postal reform measure."

It went beyond their wildest dreams. The rapid rise in literacy; an unexpected consequence. The passion to learn played a great role. With the internet we have the greatest learning and productivity tool so far.

The case and outcomes for a digital COMsumer Post will go way beyond our thinking today. The final comments here introduce an idea, that creates markets for digital identity by moving the postal system from an industrial paradigm to today's knowledge paradigm.

Should we look at POST another way? At issue is the value of access to our personal mailbox. We think about e-mail without thinking about the history and purpose of the postal system. Today the post box in front of my house is public and I receive 98% ineffective direct mail offers. Some put up no solicitation signs etc. The telephone directory is public and I suffer more abuse from telemarketers. However e-mail is completely free. Get my address get spam! Put an e-mail on a website, get more spam.

Is it possible that what we have is the postal system before the stamp revolution? Stamps put a price on sending. However they also drove efficiencies that enabled lower tarriffs, and accelerated more profitable exchages, be they personal or business. (Can anyone tell me where bills and checks fit into this story and early timeline?) Have you looked recently at the value spent dumping trash in your mailbox? Postage plus printing costs?

Our digital mail system is currently free, and increasingly suffering from receiver based inefficiencies. Could the price of free acceptance be too high? It seems the few are spoiling it for the many. It's also costing senders. It's harder than ever to look up an e-mail address. Why can't I just look it up and link it with a phone number? We give our phone numbers away almost without thinking. With e-mail there are reservations. Many have multiple addresses, separating public, business and private, with different levels of profiling information (and honesty) attached to each.

Perhaps it's time to re-think mail. How can we keep it free for the public, our preferred business suppliers etc. while putting a price on spam, that turns it back into information we want to eat.

At the same time we can return the stamp value of "post" to the people. It's no longer efficient to get your power bill via the post or pay it using the postal system. Done correctly, it's USPS that will have a problem. Perhaps literally we only need one physical delivery per week.

Let's start thinking out a solution. I'll call it COMsumer Post - after The COMsumer Manifesto. This is a world in which we all are paid to receive mail. It's a world where different levels of transparency surround our profiles. COMsumer Post is the system that enables the market for consumer information to arise.

Let me say this is not choice mail! Both Kevin Werbach and Jon Udell made recent posts on that subject. This piece on the impact of choice mail Jon's Radiois a great illustration. Choice mail assumes all incoming mail is spam unless it's mails from a buddy - approved source.

More to come.... Tying Smart Mobs to Post and Digital Identity.

When I find myself keying in to thought pieces with alternate future scenarios I'm always looking for another edge;  a dynamic or systemic change that starts my early warning radar.  

In Are we doomed yet Salon poses an update on the Bill Joy Wired Article which I found far too gloomy. The Salon abstract:

The computer-networked, digital world poses enormous threats to humanity that no government, no matter how totalitarian, can stop. A fully open society is our best chance for survival.

What really caught my eye were these closing sentences:

If we allow our basic attitude toward knowledge to shift -- if we get in the business of criminalizing, censoring, monitoring, and limiting various kinds of knowledge -- I believe we will very quickly slip away from the ideals of universal education, open scientific enquiry, entrepreneurism, equality of opportunity, and the fecundity of creative effort that has made Western democracies so strong during the past two centuries.

I've never thought about the tech changes overturning the ideal of universal education.  I can't imagine my children's world will want that to happen.  Yet a few more Iraq's and literacy could be encouraged round the world to go backward. I hope it not a symbol or early indicator of this.   

The counter to this is the open society that is alluded to.  We won't have it unless we wrestle with the economics in such a way that everyone can be connected to the net. Who's thinking out there on how to connect up everyone with a universal connection? A univeral right!

It's worth the read, even if it just brings you back to using voice recognition software and thinking more about nanobots. 

How might the growing interest in linking digital identity, blogging wiki's, RSS feeds etc evolve?  How might the emergent functionalities in these tools benefit our evolution and daily experiences. How will they combine and spiral to augment our collective intelligence? How will they reframe the KM knowledge innovation paradigm? For most companies it's happening more rapidly than they think. 

There's a saying "the future is here  - it is just unevenly distributed" (William Gibson). This couldn't be more true when we start to apply it to emerging lightweight knowledge innovation tools and combine it with what we know about mobility, decentralization, hyperconnectivity, online identity etc. 

Yet using the metaphor "standing in the future" we almost inevitably find ourselves reframing the space we compete in today. 

I facilitated the chart below about three weeks ago before going somewhat silent (at least on my blog) when exploring early ideas for transforming a "systems integration business" into an innovation engine.  As the tools paradigm developed we kept spiraling back to the benefits. Each iteration breaking a new frontier, each new technology providing new functionality.   

It's a WIP (work-in-progress) and making the point that all these technologies are already available they are not just effectively connected yet.  For the most part it will be bloggers reading this.  Some have the curiosity to ask:  Is corporate blogging just noise or part of a greater shift.  What about wiki's and the broader aspects of augmented social networks? Etc. 

For my part I've seen no clear model of where corporate blogging is heading.  Yet I firmly believe that blogs are part of the emerging value creation spiral.  The recent wave on posting on wiki's, forums, corporate blogs reaffirm this interest.  Similarly thoughts keep emerging about creativity and innovaton. The underlying thread is a move from systemic innovation to transformative innovation (about which I will define separately).

A few years ago Tom Stewart wrote "Intellectual Capital" and more recently followed it up with "The Wealth of Knowledge".  I'd suggest if we really think about the chart above -- IC /KC merely set us on a pathway.  The (not new) idea of "Collective Intelligence" is just now beginning to reframe how we think about capital and the types of organizations.  We now know that organizations will increasingly compete through their collaborative networks. While it's not just asking better questions -- it's the capability to capture and harness the hidden ones.  More peer driven, more decentralized; almost certainly. 

It's transforming innovation capital (lets not get hung up on definitions of Capital here) simply because what we are now after is hidden.  It is primarily social and these new tools are helping us to uncover the wealth that was always there, always undisclosed, tacit unless tapped, and too infrequently accessed.  Even a small start would include employee who's thoughts or interests you never before knew, to teams doing collaborative manual building, and spontaneous connections enabled through who we know in trusted networks. 

This is nothing less than the beginning for framing tools and an evolutionary path to a  radical shift in the collective intelligence of teams, communities of practice and organizations.

There could be much more to this post.  A little encouragement and a few questions and I might just get back into writing again. 

A little over a week ago I had the pleasure of listening to Doug Engelbart at the Planetworks conference.  Doug's summed up his life's work for the conference: "As much as possible boost mankinds collective capability for coping with complex urgent problems." 

As he developed his view of the world I realized there were similarities to the chart above  -- originally tracing to conversations I'm in with George Por which started and were furthered in France a few weeks ago.  In Doug's chart the frontier (cloud in mine) is constantly changing.  His concepts which I'm still discovering include... The "Hyperscope", "NIC's" - network improvement communities and "DKR's - dynamic knowledge repositories.  They fit easily within the above. 

One word of caution.  This is a somewhat generic chart.  Organizations wanting to explore this space must develop their own pathways augmenting their current competences and enhancing the culture of their organization.  Then having the "foresight" to take this forward begins with a few small bets or prototypes and a few committed individuals.  The key to motivating individuals to participate is creating the clear need for change and building the excitement for what the future might bring. 

 I have to confess... I'm envious of my daughter's (11) buddylist. I'm also fascinated how AIM adoption amongst all her friends in the last year is changing communications patterns.   I don't think I've ever had six or more buddy screens open at the same time.  Yet for her it's common place and I think she loses interest when it is less than three.   Of her list 96% are from her year which means about 50% of the kids in fifth grade are on her list.  Is it the norm?  How would I know. No matter it changes how I communicate with my kids.  IM is great and makes me more accessible. 

So when I saw this link via Many to Many and Clay Shirky.  Social Software How Instant Messaging Augments Conversations I followed it though to Stewart Butterfield.  There are more appropriate references there.  Still in the context of my daughter this helped.

"Part of this is because it is OK to not answer an IM until you are ready—a pause of 30 seconds is perfectly acceptable where it wouldn’t be in voice (and the answerer doesn’t even have to hold the question in their mind while doing something else, but can refer back to it later)."

There is also a great set of comments there.  Despite K's list and visible groups they seldom use a chat room together, according to her it not as much fun.  I'm not sure if this is just time, experience, or gossip. 

Still the italics above are consistent with what I've observed.  The kids are no longer shy or embarassed to "talk to boys" -- they have time to think about their responses.  The old phone paranoia is gone. 

From my own interactions she periodically corrects her short-hand spelling in the next post with a "*word" the asterik meaning correction.  Of course I don't have a technorati on her buddy list (although there is a program that does it from memory). Still this group has their own shorthand. and it's not just "wut u tnk"

Should I be worried? It beats having the phone tied up. 

Is the current Social Software meme really just part of something much larger? Will the ideas behind Collective Intelligence shape the future development and direction? Sometimes I look at something and intuitively know there's something relevant but perhaps not ready for transmission or simple to translate into plain english.  I have a suspicion tonight that Britt Blaser, Flemming Funch and Xpertweb may just be an illustration - an early indicator of this style of model. 

From the University of Ottawa and the emerging Collective Intelligence Lab.  The top half of the chart represents our collective Intellectual Capital in the virtual world.  Contrast this with the lower quadrant which more closely represents the collection of structural capital, social capital and process capital found in the physical world. 

I find this model interesting for two reasons. 

• First there is no real mention of financial or customer capital.  This is a real departure and a major shift re "collective". If delight exists... then it is in the top half...and experienced on a higher plain.  
• The second, is more an observation.  The debate around social software continues to focus too often on the physical manifestations rather than the virtual - spriitual elements that enable - augment and benefit real collective intelligence.  

Note the following charts can both be found via the link above. 

This second chart suggests for each pole a two way relationships.  While this looks incredibly complex I believe it could be simplified into a short questionnaire and then provided in a radar format as a development tool.   

One item is certain.  Unless they all interplay together --- spiraling value creation is a pipedream.  There is also an underlying thread in these postings.  Pierre Levy talks about informational capitalism which includes; Cooperative competition Competitive advantage to the inventors of the most cooperative games. Well Xpertweb is a cooperative game.  While contrasting this with conscious consumption controlled by a transparent cybermarkets could bring with it unexpected communism.

This is worth following for: Knowledge Innovation, Strategic Foresight, human tools development and the evolution of our desires.

I'm at the WFS World Future Society conference and there is a dearth of plugs and power. WIFI? So far forget it. It seems I can get a very weak signal via T-mobile from the Starbucks I presume across the street. The Hyatt Embarcadero for all effective purposes --- I'm in the basement of backwardness. I registered this morning at a desk in the old fashioned way. There are no bar codes no RFID buttons, no access to the net, looks like no back channel chat, ...... This seems to be quickly verifying one of the reasons I decided to attend. What are futurists? How future oriented are they?

In just fifteen minutes... I can see there is nary a laptop in sight - not that it is a criteria --- I'm going to feel strange here. My blogs won't be live. Will post them when I can.

I've had an interest in futures for many years. Probably like many people here. For me it was Alvin Tofflers first books as a teenager influenced by my Dad who was a rocket scientist.  Caught me in a lifelong curiosity about the future. 

After all these years I've never been to a WFS Conference before. A quick preview of the agenda suggests I explore some of the "spiritual and consciousness" agenda items, while continuing to try and track where they are on social change. I'm in a room of maybe 70 people. The average age is older than we'd like. There are many sessions avialable. Probably 700 here. It's a little potluck. I chose this one because I recognized the names. It was a toss-up ... this or an FBI guy on Homeland Security.

Session One. Peter Russell  "The Future Evolution of Consciousneess". Key points paraphased.

How fast can we adapt to change? Can we find a deeper inner stability in ourselves? Need help to deal with stress. Lot of stress comes from living in the future. What we are realling looking for is a longing for the "experience" of the present. Human consiousness is not really valued by society. Newsmedia are not really interested in it. Not on politcal agenda, etc. Science basically ignore consiousness. Despite Science's capability to to push back boundaries... nothing in science that explains why any of us have a certain thought. It's an anomaly!!

Are we moving to a new model? Is consiousness as important as space time and matter? Is consiousness the "hard problem"? Are we approaching a new metaparadigm? This doesnt threaten physical sciences. What it does begin to do is open a whole new understanding of what people have been saying about deep experiences for 1000's of years. The inner journey / mystics will be really crucial for where we are going. How can we free ourselves from our old mindset. Can we wake up to what makes us really think about what make us consious human beings.

Lot of stress here just trying to find a plug and I can forget WiFi. After so many recent conferences with WiFi everywhere I feel a little out of place... am the only one tapping away on a keyboard. Maybe I should be trying to aborb this at a deeper level. There are no slides in this session. Now the reason why I came to this session. Barbara Marx Hubbard

Conscious evolution is the context for the transition we are undergoing. Evolutionary concsiousness. The qualities are:

1. Inner traditional the oneness the source the spirt ...
2. Extend backwards in space times... cosmogenisis or cosmic evolutionary consiousness expanded reality. Just identify with the billions of years that is embodied with our genetic DNA. She "surfs the spiral" and feels that surge of intense evolution in me. "How could I possibly be depressed?" Assoiciating with de... chardan.
3. The rise of the cocreative human: a new type of human. with evolutionary consiousness to consciously evolve or destruct.  That is why evolutionary consciousness is a matter for human survival. If we assume that consciousness is prime. (Recommends: The LIFE DEVINE by? and the book The Jesus Mystery.)

This evolves --- human evolutions. there are many types of homo sapiens sapiens... call it homo universalis... Are we becoming self-evolving? It is not a univeral universe it is a participatory. The emerging view of human universalis is a major step to consious evolutionary psychology. Emergence and convergence. Emergence out of Homo Sapiens Sapiens.  There are many menbers of this species that think their own consiousness is shifitng. It starts with a conception - an awakening, an opening a mystical experience. Once one has had a conception experience there is a gestation period within the wome of self consiousness.  You will feel there is something missing. The inner devine informing the essential self.... Shifting idenity from ego to essence. If the human specieis is going though a quantum jump in the noosphere a mature thinking layer what might be like on the other side of the transition? It becomes an interesting idea.

Can we retain a continuity of consciousness so we don't keep forgetting? .... Can we remain consious though bodies ...... the physical aspect of ourselves created though the consious side of things. The animal human lifecyle is completely ridiculous.... for if consiouness is prime... then we will become conscious creators on a universal scale... then we will be a universal species. consious co-creators... If consiousness is evolutionary .... can we expect to influence it... because we actually are... eg changing DNA... has led to the capacity to change our own evolution.

See Alan Lithman... "the evolutionary agenda" out of egoic transformations.... eg homo polaris... awakened to emergent capacities that is guided by an internal star of intuition. The technology that consciouness is creating has become disconnected from its rea meaning. "Voices of the Gods" book about resonance and being of the coming. "I am!" Is there a turing test for Consiousness. eg prayer affects sick patients. beyond faith... How might the unversality of consicousness come into being? Association made with Spiral Dynamics here. that seems relevant to me. See "EVOLVE" Barbaras...

What do i think about this sesssion This is a neat interpretation of the Singularity.

Why is it that Future Studies has never really gotten off the ground.  This was an interesting session.  Certainly helped my perspective.  I've often thought that it is everyones job to study the future. Still -- And I'm already getting the feeling here.... there is often too much talk about the future, and not enough intelligent analysis.  Yes it needs some constructs and frameworks.  Plus while the overshoot analysis may be correct....  

(Mini note: Lack of access to hook links while listening is reducing my pleasure of being here. Still can't believe I am the only one with a laptop open in this session (ah someone else has joined. as far as i can tell....must be 50 here). Redefining strange. Should question whether I am strange wanting to blog this and add it to my bank of memories? Now thinking that here I am and the speakers.. aren't enabling my interaction or connection with some form of avatar or even FOAF. Gosh would be nice to have some of their links etc, confirm my presence and set a possible dialogue for later. The speakers are also here for exchanges. The system is limiting them.)

Convergence and Collision:  Creating a new filed of applied foresight: (Paraphrasing again)

Begins with a story from HG Wells about the impact of the automobile. What we could have just learned if we had anticipated the automobile. Could Professors of Foresight have foreseen all this? Ie What we have today?

Rick Slaughter's conslusion after 20+years is that our species is headed for the overshot and collapse reality. Basically the rational that gets me going is "perceptions of real danger" is what can change the system.... too many futures just help people get along with the subsidiary things. Idea of Strategic Foresight! Realised that conventional strategic planning is dull... "foresight refreshes strategy" the ulitimate goal... "sustaining social foresight" every individual has it... how do we bring forward the practioners to make it happen?

Peter Bishop University of Houston Clear Lake: Can we do anything. Is there any hope for foresight to help is create a better future in the future? Can we use Foresight to improve the human condiiton?

1. Knowledge we might be able to have about the future.
2. Most is highly contigent, but putting knowledge in front of them clearly infom. Try and lay out what we know in predicted and in the alterantive ways of where we might end up. Recommend where we might end up... choosing the best course of action... capacity to value, can affect the mix of recommmendations.
3. Falls well out side of foresight ... why don't we take action ourselves? Why do people blank out and make assumptions?  Do we have good knowledge about the future? We just don't have perfect knowledge. Our reasoning has unconsious influences. The values are nowhere clear. The problem is how do you weight. We've found pushing the buttons of society didn't work.

How will society respond?. Some 30 years later we are more humble - we know we don't know, and so strategic foresight faces a number of hurdles. The 20th century was a century of psychology... the elevation of individual above all things. That came down to an individual discussion of foresight. In society we can't act only as individual, and have found the modern conception was not quite valid. The invention of democracy and politics is about the pursuit and maintenance of power within a framework. The second is the free market and capitalism. Two solutions show how we can have colelctive solutions that can improve it all. These are examples of collective activiities that have solved some of the decision making.

What are we to do in an ecology of ideas. Richard Dawkins ideas of memes... they live in a ecology. based on their abitity to survive and propagate themelves. Proposing mulitiple answers and letting them beat up on each other... is perhaps... the way to address the threat of overshoot and collapse? Current restrictions in the free flow of information is limiting responses.  There are not enough sources of ideas about the future fueling the ecology of ideas... hope is the internet is a place where that might yet happen. Central sources of info remain a problem.  Our knowledge is a function of choice. choosing what we should know and believe. How do you make choices unless you know what the choices are? Point out to people that they have choices. Choices in their actions and thoughts.