TED Conversations

John Gianino

This conversation is closed.

Social Network or Tribe

We have the ability and the resources to change the world.
Please read the comments below and reply to them, if you have thoughts.
The TED Talks I've related to this conversation are very inspiring, check them out.

Large social networks can be thought of as groups of tribes. We form tribes early in life based on where we are born and raised. These tribes or social circles can have tremendous impact on our development and our direction in life.

In our current system. we compete for money and we work for attention. The more skilled you are, the connections you have, and the attractive qualities you possess come to form our personal value along with our contributions.

The idea is similar to a human brain. The body supplies resources to the entire brain and certain regions of the brain get more based on stimulus but every cell gets enough to live and has the opportunity to be stimulated and grow. The functional structures of the brain can be an analogy for organizations and companies in our world.

We now have the the foundation to establish a virtual social network that can basically govern a population and supply jobs. In virtual social networks there are accountability, qualitative, and quantitative indicators already built into virtual social networks that can give value to the contributions we supply online and offline. If we supply good contributions we are rewarded, if we supply bad contributions or nothing at all, we are not rewarded. This can be implemented on a personal performance basis and we can still supply resources to everyone connected on a lower sustainable level.

http://youtu.be/qv8Xn7PUcI4 This is a similar idea but still based on an antiquated concept that money will always we necessary.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Mar 5 2013: Hi John,

    This is a good question!

    Here's some things to ponder:

    1. What does the human unit bring to the group?
    2. What are the roles of the institutions we create?
    3. Are institutions entities?
    4. What does the environment we inhabit have to say about us and our institutions?
    5. How do we keep our laws and institutions in step with our environment?
    6. What is the diference between "adapted" and "adaptable?
    7. What are the limits of human comprehension of complex non-linear systems?
    8. Would you willingly live next door to a redneck?
    • thumb
      Mar 5 2013: Mitch,
      We can Google all these answers and relate them to the conversation. What are your interests in the conversation?
      • thumb
        Mar 7 2013: Hi John,

        True. Google has some advantages.

        My interest is to see where this thread goes - and I hope more than one person actually did google these questions - they are cogent (even the redneck one - gotta have it where you live and not just in the google-cloud).

        So - firstly, we don't need to go looking for some design of a society - it is default .. we don't make it, we allow it. So anarchy is the way forward. This is what is being demonstrated on the internet today .. it's a very pale copy of real-life community, but you can see it happening like some kind ofg new thing .. but it's just what happens when people are allowed to be default. On that score, we should defend our right to be wild and not tollerate the CISPA/SOPA/ACTA attempts to destroy it.

        So look at all the things that destroy our default wild-community,. These are ythe enemy of community. including: law, religion, schools, prisons, governments .. i.e. all our institutions.
        Institutions begin OK, but they all get poisoned .. and what are they poisoned by? alpha males .. and after that - alpha females. HAve a look - institutons start out as a passive principle. Take for instance "education". When practivced as a passive principle, the students go to learn, when active they go to be trained, disciplined and indoctrinated. Law is instituted as a resort for those in conflict - but now it is the instrument of violation, government started as enslavement by alpha males, after thousands of years we pulled it back to "democracy" so we could choose our persecutor .. for a little while it even looked a bit like representation, but that fairytale is ended. We created corporations to gather the increase of human collaberation, and they have turned to viruses on community and government.
        Our institutions are at war with us and each other - simply by switching from passive to active.
        This is the measure of a pathalogical entity - the difference between a parasite and a symbiot.

        Don't create any more of these.
        • thumb
          Mar 7 2013: Mitch,
          Everything changes and people may compare our societal behaviors with different organisms but, we are uniquely human. Our ability to create change for good or for bad is influenced by our interest.
      • thumb
        Mar 7 2013: Yes .. but we are constrained in language to deal with extrinsic symbology - the extrinsic .. and these extrinsics must reduce the noise of result for whatever entity we are promoting for survival - meta or instantiated.

        All I aim to do here is to point out that our meta capacity was not our doing - it is a reult of the continuum of the instantiated. We assume that we are the master of our history, and thereby own our futures - which we do not. And, it looks like we own that future in a descending curve.

        we can have our meta. And in that meta, I try to help by observing that the meta-creatures we spawn and instantiate are immature.

        I hint that the turn of an entity from symbiote to parasite is based on teh principle of passive/active.

        I cannot know for sure, but I investigate the modulation of entropy as the genesis of a skin - if it has a skin, it is an entity - and by virtue of that skin, the flow of entropy is modulated to give rise to a "self" and that all which defines a "self" is survial. this infers a definite atractor, and yet the meta can be strange - e.g. the weather .. and our meta constructs all seem strange - e.g "mother nature".

        I would say that if you can pinch a skin and get smacked in the head for it, then you are dealing with reality. All else is strange, and we had better admit it and work out the damn math if we get smacked in the head.

        I recommend you download netllogo and get exploring. Or join up with this little course:
        And/or present your papers .. it would be nice to allow the "wild university" to start delivering de-institutionalised scientific method - peer review from real peers.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.