Nigel Bamber

Head of Structural Analysis, Caterham F1 Team
Petersfield, Hampshire, United Kingdom

About Nigel

An idea worth spreading

Want to make John Lennons' Imagine come true. See my website for more.

I'm passionate about

Collaborative Society. Sustainable Economy. Renewable Energy. Efficient Vehicles

Talk to me about

Anything interesting and intelligent.

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
Continuing the economics description of the club from the posting below. The first rule was everyone should seek to maximise their own happiness. Lets introduce a second rule. People can choose whether to follow the first rule or the second rule. The second rule is "Everyone should seek to maximise the happiness of others that they interact with." If you are following the second rule, it makes sense to cluster together with others doing likewise. Whilst you are helping others, they will be helping you, so that you can help them further. From this positive feedback loop emerges a cohesive society. In the past you had to be in the same geographic location to provide this help and so the potential for this society to grow was limited. With the coming of mass communication you can interact with anyone anywhere to provide the help and the scope is limitless. The proposed club is a way of identifying that an individual or organisation is pursuing the second rule and so you should interact with them. It does not give you any signal that you should conflict with people still following the first rule. Concluding with an allegory pinched from religion. In Hell there is pleny of food, but you are only allowed to eat it using a 6ft long spoon, which you must hold at the end of the handle. Everyone starves for eternity. In Heaven, same food, same spoons, same rules, but everyone is well fed. They have learnt to feed each other. It's no good having a long spoon and noone else to feed. Join the club and use that spoon.
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
Many people here have proposed that the best way to achieve change is through individuals making that change in their own interactions, and examples have been given of where that is happening. I have proposed a "club" to unite these individuals under a common banner to increase their impact. Some concerns have been raised that this could be dangerously divisive. I'd like to explain why I think it would be helpful. Firstly the club does not exclude people. It only includes people who choose to be a part of it. The club does not select people. People select the club. It does not fall into the trap that Orwell shows us in "Animal Farm" of "Four legs good, two legs bad." On the farm, it would just say "Four legs good". I'll use the language of economics to illustrate why the club is necessary. Economics is based upon the objective of increasing an individuals happiness. I think we're all OK with that part. Next it says that an individual can increase their happiness by acting in their own interest. This is a very simple rule and has been very popular throughout history. People like simple rules because it means they don't have to think about things too deeply. But there is a thing called emergence that means a lot of entities following simple rules can result in very complex mass behaviour. Economists measure happiness in terms of an individuals access to resources. They recognise that there is a scarcity of resources. Following the main rule in an envrionment of resources scarcity means that you can only increase your happiness at the expense of anothers. This is where the concept of "Possession is theft" arises. So within minutes of the game starting, society is beginning to divide. After a while, self-interested individuals discover that they can obtain more resources by clubbing together and using their united power to take from a larger number of people. The corporation is born. And so the simple rule generates the complex society we have to day.
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
Fritzie, I was not implying that people with different religeous beliefs could not cooperate. I was trying to find a form of words to persuade people who think that their form of belief does prevent cooperation. We appear both to be very lucky. I work in a very multi-faith and multi-racial environment. On my desk alone we have at least 4 different belief systems. This is not true everywhere and just a few miles from my home there are still marks on a wall caused by a bomb, planted by people who felt their faith prevented any form of cooperation with others. As for age, I am old enough to have been both the first person to hold a newborn child and the last person to hold a dying old person. I am young enough to still think that building sand castles is still a great way to spend your time on a beach :-). You provide many examples of the ways in which change is being carried out. You appear reluctant to have these linked as the "club" as this would be divisive, Let me try another way to explain why the club would be a positive move. This is probably going to smash completely through the 2000 character limit, but I hope it helps. I do realise that the more I write, the less likely people are to read it. I wonder to what extent the shape of a TED conversation shapes the conversation, but that is another thread. I'll contine this at the head of the conversation.
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
Fritzie, I was extremely grateful for you taking the time to review Cynapse. I must say that I hadn't appreciated that my mentioning of WikiLeaks and Occupy gave the impression that Cynapse agreed with their confrontational methods. I had intended that referring to them gave an example the level of dissatisfaction with the status quo felt by a wide range of people. I can see that, in the light of recent events, there may be a real fear amongst people if they think that their online activities are monitored and they appear to be associated with "subversive" activities. I wonder how the fear of online surveillance will shape future political debate. I wonder how free the free actually feel. The whole concept of Cynapse is not to engage with the old guard, but to connect with the new. I'll see if I can reword the introduction to clarify this. This is why I needed new eyes to look at it :-). Personally, I felt that the detailed investigation of how open source economics resembled anarcho-communism, would be a big turn off fo some people. Mainly because the words "anarchy" and "communism" carry with them a lot of cultural baggage and associations which bear no relation to their literal meanings. I also struggled to look for a mechanism for cooperation between believers of different religions, and non-believers. I have read Benkler and Shirky. In fact, such a large number of the original sources and authors that I looked at had done TED talks, that I started to think that using these jewel-like precis would be a good way to get across what I was learning quickly. If you think there is a chance that people are not listening, it is usually accepted that less detail is more. I was hoping that Cynapse would provide a meeting place for people to help to assemble reference material across this massive front of subjects.e.g. Political Philosophy Organisational Theory Cyber-communication Ethics and Empathy Religous Philosophy Economics Intellectual Property.. ..the list goes on
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
Colleen and Fritzie, I think I was thinking more in the way of TED not having the sort of collaborative, wikki-type tools that a lot of open source software (and increasingly hardware) projects have to help groups to self-organise projects in the non-virtual world. Hence the feeling that the "club" needed a number of arms, of which TED could be a part. Collaborative tools and methods would be another part and how to make them available are one of the topics I am interested in studying further. Fritzie, There are so many crowd/open source forums out there, but it's a question of not seeing the overall contextual wood for the trees that I hope we can address, and show that they are all moving towards similar goals for society. It would be great to bring them all under a uniform banner. This common identification would provide motivation for those already involved, inspiration for those who aren't, and allow each group to share their successful methods whilst learning what doesn't work. Perhaps the club, as well as being a forum, should provide a directory or wikki of shared resources for all of these disparate individuals and organisations. A reason why IDEO could be identified as part of the club, perhaps? I am extremely grateful for your feedback on Cynapse. I'm drafting a reply, but with the apparent time zone difference between us you must feel like you are conversing with someone on Mars :-)
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
In reply to Colleen (why only three deep threads?) I think that TED is a part of the club. It is a forum for the ideas and debates that provide the inspiration, but does not provide the actions that form the perspiration. Incidentally, it is the best forum I have found that does this. But, there are people who are part of the movement that have never, and probably will never have heard of or have access to TED. The Aids worker in central Africa The soup kitchen worker in India The teenage programmer in their room coding a patch for Linux The gardener in Rumania who leaves spare apples from their tree at the gate for passers-by to take. There doesn't seem to be a way to use TED to initiate or coordinate real world actions and projects. Another potential thread, but has anyone got any ideas on how a real world project could be initiated from within TED and what might be a suitable project to start with to trial this?
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
The problem is that there isn't a club. There needs to be one. It's easy for individuals to think that they are the only person who thinks the way we live is wrong, and therefore perhaps they must be the one that is wrong instead. As Fritzie says, there are millions of people trying to live by different, peaceful rules. Perhaps tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions the world over, detaching (or wanting to detach) from the way in which society, governments and business have become, but how can we know? How can we count them? If it can be demonstrated that there is a significant will for change, that will encourage more people to think about changing and actually doing it. Humans learn by copying. So I think we need a club, a badge, a banner, a name, to show that there are people who want a peaceful, empathic alternative. To bring together all the existing individuals and organisations who are working in that direction. We need to be able to shout "I am a part of this!"
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
The promised follow-up on the Co-opernation! (with a delightfully enjoyable read!)
Hi William, Like you, as I watched more and more TED talks, I noticed connections and themes that appeared to show an emerging zeitgeist at odds with how the world is actually run. I started to investigate these themes in the blog. I think one of the issues that you have to beware of is that the analogy of a corporation brings with it all sorts of expectations, not the least that work done for it will be paid. That creates a very high bar to entry as the funds to achieve this have to be raised. Investors usually require a working prototype or proof of a business case. For this reason, you might want to start by looking at how open source projects can evolve into revenue earning entities over time. With open source, the entry bar is low and people can give as much or as little time as they want. You can demonstrate to investors that the network of people that you have assembled is effective, whilst growing the network. Humans learn by copying. Make something small and manageable that others can grow by copying. This will hopefully take some of the load that you feel away.
154390
Nigel Bamber
Posted almost 2 years ago
Revolution! ... or peaceful protest? What is the best method for change, and why should we be talking about it?
A government can only govern with the consent of its' subjects. That consent, however, can take an infinite variety of forms, from dumb acceptance of the status quo, all the way through to failing to defeat an oppressive regime in a physical conflict (If you surrender, you are unfortunately giving consent in real terms). I'm interested in the idea that consent could be withdrawn by gradually engaging less and less with the governing regime. Bit by bit, setting up and growing an alternative society and infrastructure until eventually the regime is irrelevant. Market economics has been particularly successful at this, growing alternate corporate infrastructures to the extent that "democratic" governments are becoming less and less influential, and have less power over them. Perhaps a similar process could be initiated putting people at the heart of its' ethos, rather than money. For the first time in history, we have the communication tools to set up societies that transcend geographical, conventional political boundaries. Some countries have already realised the potential power placed in the hands of ordinary people with mass networked communications, and clamped down on it. Other are preparing to meet this threat, by monitoring the network. Some time ago, I did quite a bit of research into what an alternative networked society might look like. I recorded a lot of this in a blog. www.cynapse1000.weebly.com . The arguments presented are best read chronologically. My experiment failed to reach critical mass to become self-sustaining. Prehaps the premise was wrong, perhaps my methods were wrong, perhaps only the time was wrong. I would be delighted if people could take a look and give me any feedback or comments.