Skip to main content

Home/ (HBSN) How to Build a Social Network/ Group items tagged observation

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Wildcat2030 wildcat

Why POiU? Why now? « POiU - 11 views

  •  
    "POiU is being created because the world is changing. The recent expansion of social media platforms shrank our world and broadened people's ability to communicate and connect regardless of physical location, cultural or even linguistic barriers. In addition to immense opportunities, we face significant challenges as a community. If not addressed and decisively tackled, these challenges could jeopardize the quality of life and even our very existence as an evolving human civilization. There are warning signs already: the widespread economic and financial instability, unclear energy future, uncontrollable environmental changes and growing gaps and failures to deliver adequate food, water, healthcare, education, and other resources and services that support society wellbeing and development. These warning signs could lead to acute and systemic crises resulting in general misery and destruction. Our best chance at overcoming this outcome is to utilize the tools we have today to tap into the collective wisdom and together select the best solutions and together put them into action. History teaches us that war has been the way in which countries could achieve total coordination to pull out of massive economical crises. But today, social networks present an alternative, allowing total coordination of the masses. This is a tool that, for the first time in our evolution, offers a constructive way to unlock the power of our collective mind and unite us under a common purpose of finding answers to our current challenges. Our future is at stake. Focusing on the opportunities and solutions, POiU will capitalize on the power of social networking to enable positive change. Together, we are building a fully functioning online society with governance and commerce, fostering a personal sense of place and belonging. This effort is empowered by POiU's launch of a collaborative platform that aims to become one component of the new coordinating system we need. The answers to our cha
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    Wildcat - are you a participant? Do you know any of the folks participating in POiU? I'm interested; what I see (in about 30 minutes) verifies the way I see the world going! Your other thoughts?
  •  
    no, actually I just came across this few days ago and still trying to understand the idea.. that we need a new coordinating system is beyond dispute, however if Poiu has anything of value to add to the debate I am not sure, will do some more research..
  •  
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Exchange_Trading_Systems does look like the general idea. I do think that the world is entering a period of 'collectivity' but it's not formed in any place that's far enough along to know what to do with it except to 'volunteer' at this point.
  •  
    ok... this is eerily like what we were describing yesterday in: http://message.diigo.com/message/so-i-will-now-try-a-bit-of-blogging-my-aunt-observed-today-that-social-networking-is-the-21st-cen-723705 Also, they say it is a country. VERY interesting. Kinda reminds me of Mr Lee's Greater Hong Kong franchises in Neal Stephenson's "Snowcrash" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash Of course by the time set in the story private countries are physical and not only virtual.
Jack Logan

apophenia: Facebook's move ain't about changes in privacy norms - 17 views

  • When I learned that Mark Zuckerberg effectively argued that 'the age of privacy is over' (read: ReadWriteWeb), I wanted to scream. Actually, I did. And still am. The logic goes something like this: People I knew didn't used to like to be public. Now "everyone" is being public. Ergo, privacy is dead. This isn't new. This is the exact same logic that made me want to scream a decade ago when folks used David Brin to justify a transparent society. Privacy is dead, get over it. Right? Wrong!
  •  
    Ouch, David Brin ...
  • ...5 more comments...
  •  
    zucherberg's position cannot be taken seriously, it is too self serving
  •  
    David Brin has it right, if right means that we'll all have to give up a great deal more of our privacy - Internet, planes, personal ID (openID), credit cards, et al., - can you think of an area of life that has become more private in the last 10 years?
  •  
    I think the key here is that we cannot believe that this is acceptable or inevitable. 9/11 allowed the US government to remove freedoms with the consent of the population based on their fear. "Those who trade freedom for security deserve neither" (forget the source of that quote, don't feel like looking it up, shouldn't a bot do that for me as soon as I put quotes in?) While I doubt they are this sophisticated, if the militant theocracies who control their populations wanted to destroy the freedoms americans had and make the US more like themselves, they have been winning this war with our consent. There are powerful forces destroying our privacy and freedom. It is time to wake up before the frog gets boiled. Sorry gotta go, black helicopter landing in backyard
  •  
    LOLROF! There's a black helicopter landing in my backyard too! LOL
  •  
    you guys may want to take another look at Brin. I believe his observation is that privacy is going away (has actually been gone for a while). the question he poses is who will have access and control of the surveillance systems. he is advocating that we ALL do rather than centrally controlled organizations.
  •  
    his book is on my shelf, my wife started reading it but stopped as she found it too depressing - it will likely be right up my alley - if we accepted the premise that we would be in a surveilled state then it would be enormously helpful that it was a commons- I do not accept that we should allow this surveilled state to happen, nor that we should accept it as good, even if it is a commons. I also don't believe that it will be a commons. It should not exist, and should be fought every step of the way by people whose minds have not opened so far that their brains have fallen out. It is completely possible with technology to give individuals the power to set levels of privacy to particular counter parties. It is politically possible to regulate the use of surveillance. One can make the argument that people can simply surveil with their camera phones, but you do not see that happening as it would be culturally unacceptable (rude if you will). I find the acceptance of big brother as inevitable troubling.
  •  
    David Brin used well thought out logic to make his argument. Zuckerburg is an idiot. He's the face of 1984's Big Brother, except at puberty.
frank smith

Joe Frank :: Official Web Site - 2 views

  •  
    "Joe celebrates a history of grandiose business failures: a ski resort built in the Sahara, a knowledge-enhancing computer chip implanted in the brain; a teleportation booth to solve the problem of rush hour commuting; the dispersion of aphrodisiacs during battle in an effort to harmlessly distract the enemy."
  •  
    I HIGHLY recommend Joe Frank in general and this piece specifically. If you want my stance on go go gettem capitalism and motivational psychology, just listen to "An Enterprising Man"
  •  
    Also, for the topic of being qualified to do what you attempt, try listening to "Ascent to K2" from Joe Frank. If you make a free acct on his site you can find this one in the online stuff.
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20 items per page