Reed's law or Group-Forming value-add affordance of networks grows much faster  than either Sarnoff or Metcalfe calculations of value.  Nice graphs showing how the three curves compare (scalar of n, square of n, and 2 to the nth power.)

"Microeconomics Community Questions TOPICS Supply, demand and market equilibrium Elasticity Consumer and producer surplus Scarcity, possibilities, preferences and opportunity cost Production decisions and economic profit Forms of competition Game theory and Nash equilibrium"

Mentioned by Howard Rheingold who said: Wilson is controversial, but the rarity of what he calls "eusocial" species and the coincidence of the advent of hunting-gathering in cooperative groups with the acceleration of human cognitive, cultural, and social capabilities supports his hypothesis: "The riddle of the human species."

recommended by Howard Rheingold,  He says: "Mark Elliott claims that Wikipedia is an example of how people use online media stigmergically." Mark Elliott says (from the site): "As stigmergy is a method of communication in which individuals communicate with one another by modifying their local environment, it is a logical extension to apply the term to many types (if not all) of Web-based communication, especially media such as the wiki."

recommended by Amy Scatliff ; she said: Also, on this thread Gilly Salmon's model came up - http://www.atimod.com/e-moderating/5stage.shtml. I'd like to link that to Gregor, what you've posted on socializing through cooperative board games. I'd love to keep the conversation going on how to scale social interaction between learners by using real world simulations and games (in my case I'm usually thinking of learners 18+) as a way to train in the skills necessary to navigate micro-interactions--is that the word that's been used?--within social dilemmas. I like to see how games can relate as closely as possible to the real-life situations being navigated.

Talking about ants, Andrés Acevedo mentioned this book saying: Dan  Suarez's novel Kill Decision, is about what might happen if  drones were run by software based on model of ant behavior.  There is a clear explanation of stigmergy and how ants use pheromones to coordinate action.  I don't think it's giving the plot away to say that bad thing happen.

Recommendation from Gregor McNish: There's a TED talk (as usual) looking at cities as systems, subject to mathematical analysis. Perhaps this external view on a situation can help us work towards improving our subjective experience.

David Watkins recommendation - video by Peter Russell on the Global Brain.

Bloom's theory of why "evil" will always be with us due it's evolving as an intrinsic part of our nature.  (Maybe a corollary to the Parable of the Tribes).

Recommendation from David Watkins: I find Bloom to be a fascinating individual with incredible scope. I find myself both drawn and repelled by his ideas. I find his website fascinating. The only book of his that I've read is "Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century." I've linked it here to Amazon; he also has a section on his website. It fits very well with the material that we've covered in this course. It is about the evolution of cooperation and identifies an emerging Global Brain that is in many ways similar to Gaia. It might even lead to a global culture, beyond Us and Them, at least in some sense.

Tool that creates a tag cloud from various text sources.

A tiny book published in 1951 by the longshoreman Eric Hoffer.  From wikipedia: The book analyzes and attempts to explain the motives of the various types of personalities that give rise to mass movements; why and how mass movements start, progress and end; and the similarities between them, whether religious, political, radical or reactionary. As examples, the book often refers to Communism, Fascism, National Socialism, Christianity, Protestantism, and Islam. Hoffer believes that mass movements are interchangeable, that adherents will often flip from one movement to another, and that the motivations for mass movements are interchangeable; that religious, nationalist and social movements, whether radical or reactionary, tend to attract the same type of followers, behave in the same way and use the same tactics, even when their stated goals or values differ.