%%2^\infty-1%%

Me and Malü showcased this project as a presentation "Community as Geometric Forms of Cells and Mycelium" at Design Science Studio all-day event on Saturday. Slides could be shared here soon!

Allowing a user to add a link to Library would be useful. Why? Because we read articles and they spark ideas and questions.

Similar functionality like Instapaper/Pocket, that allow to add a link to one place to read it later.

A form to declare Results is difficult, this prevents newbie users of sharing results.

Could this be simplified and include only:

• Project

• Happened

• Summary (rename to Result to keep it consistent, i.e. on Project page a button says "Result", so keep it here too)

• Details

• Url

• Hours Spent (merging Costs and Currency, making hour declarations as a default)

• Author

• (hiding all other fields until users learn to Declare Results and Hours)

User interactions on the project level are essential. Because when a project grows, users are motivated to keep on creating. It's a feedback loop. But it's weird to ask if each project needs help. So users end up working on their project solo, which is slow effort.

So how about this solution:

• "Challenge" button within a Project page that allows a creator to comment on what are the current challenges/needs for their project?

• This way other users (doers) can simply respond to Challenge and submit Results.

This would spark spontaneous cooperation between all users spread across many different projects and create a synergy moment, where by doing small tasks, together, these users kickstart all projects to the next level.

The same behaviour can repeat on the same level and shape cultural norms, i.e. instead of being stuck people would organise to help each other and solve all global challenges.

So, thinking along these lines, I tried to abstract the things that we collect here at 0oo. Basically:

1. Category: Function class, e.g., Goal, Category, Question
2. Method: Function prototype, e.g., Idea, Invention, Transformation
3. System: Function instance, e.g., Plan, Project, Agent, Organization, Team, Person, Equipment, Tool, Resource, Instrument
4. Task: Function call, e.g., Task, Request, Order.
5. Place: Function parameter, e.g., Location, Address, Account.
6. Result: Function response, e.g., System Log, Event, Report, Executed task, Operation, Work result, Demo, Transfer, Transaction, Log, Blog post, Press release, Product, Service deployed.

It seems, that this corresponds well to the established concepts in CS:

1. TYPES
2. OPERATORS (i.e., functions)
3. PROCESSES
4. OPERATIONS
5. OPERANDS (i.e., parameters)
6. VALUES

I want the group's to be spelled out too. I want to have to explicitly join the group that is my age group. Find some unity with the members there with question and answers

On making forms and embedding views of Airtable. ([1], [2], [3]).

[Ruta], something like "Disqus.com" :)

Meetup.com (an app for meeting people offline and online based on interests) can inspire how this Unity app could look like.

How would this app look like to ensure that each of us have multiple interests and multiple ways to relate to others?

Yes a micro government interface with direct democracy. Should scale up from a flat complex (neighbours talking about things) to streets a time to neighbourhoods to counties to countries.

[chronological], do you mean something like an app to coordinate actions with neighbours? hmm, like a micro government. citizens action.

agree on [Mindey]'s point about communication. authority comes from fear. trust i the opposite. trust is developed through communication.

[chronological], this is a cultural question.

Look out for organisations who use a decentralised approach for their management, e.g. Holocracy.

Or, a freelancer lifestyle that is all about self-organisation.

How would this feature look like from a user interface perspective? Something similar like comments within Google Docs or Medium articles?

Yes, people rarely agree with everything, but more about the parts.

Such behaviour is seen everywhere in communication! So I think this idea would help people have a sense of "togetherness" rather than "conflict".

So, I aligned this idea with a category "Humans as Community".

[Mindey], thank you so much for sending 3 videos on how to create an Airtable form and how to embed answers as blocks-grid to website!

"Universe is energy (wave) and (particles) when stable" - What does it mean as a metaphor but also as a fact?

From Mansoor Vakili writing, I noticed the following behaviours of Living Systems:

• Chaos and Randomness

• Self-Organisation

• Fractals (a pattern repeats on all levels of a system and forms a network, as a whole)

• Networks (higher level goals inform lower level goals; and as intelligence)

• Minimum effort (complex systems with simple equations)

And the following Patterns of Living Systems:

• Simplicity

• Flexibility

• Quality

• Interdependency

"Systems thinking is about relationships such as integrative, intuitive, holistic, connectedness; values such as conservation, cooperation, quality, partnership, flexibility, observant, asset management; and state of mind such as being observant, positive, forgiving, tolerant, peaceful, hopefulness and practicing unconditional love." ~ Mansoor Vakili

Yes, of course, it could be sentence-by-sentence. What's attractive about this idea, is that it could be easy to make it hyper-scalable, due to simple model.

Chains of command are like that. If you're not on a ship, the direction of which you believe in, with the leadership that you trust, it is very hard to align one's interests or do as told.

The way to break the chain of command is usually communicational: i.e., you talk to the superiors, with the interest in "the direction of the ship", and make them aware that there are better ways of doing things, and understand the reasons for the ways that the things are currently done, then making them confident in giving you the green light to go with that new innovative solution ('Mission").

On the other hand, the people with true passion for innovation and creativity are not a very good match for support of legacy systems, and are a much better match for novel systems, which is the kind of work that's often found in fields of art, research and startups, rather than established organizations with a legacy social role.

I want to be part of a group of people that are my age group, my gender, my hobbies.

I want to be part of multiple groups simultaneously.

Thinking, a popular advice on How to Create a Community says, map the desired community members and facilitate events for them. Not truth.

If a community is a system, parts don't matter, map interactions instead. That means asking, How Can Community X be linked to other Networks?

inspiration came from:

• Buckminster Fuller's thinking on Synergetics (4 is a min number for a system = a micro community)

• Symbiotic Earth movie (layers of systems within systems = our community is a mother for communities of our members)

• Living Systems Philosophy

this idea aims to shape social behaviour of humans and spread a habit of creating micro-communities!

Could this be a sentence by sentence thing?

Ideally something as simple as the bible's numbering system would work if people split up their articles whereby every one or two sentences is a verse that can be referenced.

I wish I could talk as "we" for my flat complex, to my street, to my neighbourhood, to my district, to my county to my country.

We need some UI for talking as a street level actor. We should all be able to vote on points. And points can go downwards and upwards, so people in a flat complex could vote on something to do with rubbish collection. But that point could rise to the street level.

I feel there is synergy with the Unity app with this idea.

Call it a flash community feature.

Feature requests:

• Add "Culture" as a Type for Projects.

• A way for users to "Archive" a Question or Idea by clicking a button "Archive" (so that it becomes a "silent" post but not visible on Home page), in cases of merging, duplication or even when a user realises that a previous post is not relevant anymore. Archived posts could have a label "archived" in headline or something.

• A button asking a thinker to "Clarify" a Question or Idea.

• Make adding existing Ideas to existing Projects easier (now, Ideas are added as number-codes, which sometimes creates an error).

• Enable seeing "Revisions" of what was edited when updating a Question and Ideas, because it shows a thought process of a thinker and is interesting/valuable to see for other users (e.g. WordPress websites have this function for blogging, Medium might have this function for blogging too..)

• A button "Invite a Member" to a Project.

• Have sub-projects under Project, in cases if a project is a community/membership project.

[chronological], agree! I just added an idea and a project to explore this question of Unity further.

I merged this question with https://0oo.li/intent/1343/humans-as-community , and so I will delete this question now.

// app that quizes you

This sorta reminds my old idea, this one, except, yours is more direct and a bit intrusive: you know what happened with quizzes on Facebook, and the personality profiling? The political campaign ads were targeted with laser precision. :)

By "a bit intrusive", I mean, the very idea of collecting data directly on the persons will feel "ad-hominem" to most people. People generally don't like to be judged, but they obviously want to participate in shared interest groups. So, "ad-idem" (or on ideas) would probably be the better approach. Again, it also heavily depends on how you formulate those questions... Perhaps simply joining categories can help people find like-minded people a lot.

// Stellaris

I'll have to try this game to see what you mean. :)

I'm really interested to see what can come out of this idea.

So much can be accomplished with simple unity.

Growth is not redundant because you need to advertise or recruit.

Taking a new person into the organisation is eating/nutrition.

Disposing of waste is excretion.

To make something is respiration.

Yeah, being free to live.

Hmm [Mindey], I was also thinking in what cases it makes sense to flip Fear into Curiosity, because that leads to Exploration. So, on a humanity scale, such a simple exercise matters because more people would be curious.

Is all curiosity worth following? That's another sub-question.

Some of our neural circuits are just built-in, just as some people involuntarily salivate when they see tasty food, even in pictures, or just like most people incorrectly perceive convex as concave surfaces, or just like shapes resembling people of opposite sex can make people sexually arouse.

Similarly, the sense of fear may be a subconscious result of one's particular neural circuitry. Flipping such hard-wired phobias may be as hard as changing one's sexual orientation, or as simple as forgetting to associate tasty food pictures with actual eating of food.

For example, I didn't realize that people salivate when they see pictures of food! Apparently, they look at the pictures of food as if they are the real thing, and immediately imagine what would happen if they touched it with their tongues, while I tend to look at food pictures as objects, i.e., looking at them as if it is an object to be judged and sorted rather than tasted.

// My example. I walk through the woods. Suddenly I hear the branches cracking. Now, I want to run and hide. But why?

The fear of darkness is quite rational: think of all the possibilities what may lurk in the darkness! Our ancient brain knows that there could be predators, and out there, and darkness prevents all kind of body's natural and automatic interpretation and defense systems (e.g., vision-based threat identification) to work properly: you need to delegate risk estimation to your prefrontal cortex to tame the fear :)

Collect more information and sharpen your rationality including more of the circumstantial and contextual factors you know. For example, perhaps it is so cold outside, that most predators are sleeping the winter hibernation and would not dare to attack you, or perhaps you're walking a path that's often visited by people, and you know that in this region, people are sufficiently well-off, that waiting in a frigid environment to harm someone is the last thing that could possibly be on anyone's mind, and so on.

Feature requests:

• Scroll to Top button/icon on mobile

• Selecting existing Project for existing Idea

Oh this is interesting:

"Let the Universe's journey from Nothing to Everything be inspirational" https://0oo.li/event/1/zero-to-infinity#

[Mindey], I was inspired by a real story of David Vetter in 1971 who was raised as "germ-free human" but who died because of no exposure to bacteria (mentioned in a book "Psychobiotic Revolution").

So from here I'm thinking, humans need exposure to bacteria. What kind of? I dont know yet.

[Ruta], well, I'm not sure there's a recipe how exactly. As Stephen Wolfram says, some things just need to go through entire computation (i.e., or entire evolution of thought process) to arrive at insights, and there are no shortcuts. That said, I've provided a rundown of how I thought, when commenting on MRSGREN. I'm sure you can do something similar.

[Mindey], how could I discover and organise Living Systems principles into a list of four as you did for MRSGREN idea?

// Input (Eating, Sensing) Output (Excretion, Movement) Force (Movement, Sensing) Matter (Eating, Excretion) //

Useful!

// human creativity //

Or, octopus creativity? :)

So, your hypothesis is that all organisms have:

1. Movement
2. Respiration
3. Sensing
4. Growth
5. Respiration
6. Excretion
7. Eating
8. (Nutrition)

I see where the hypothesis comes from, but had you tried to abstract it further, for example: "respiration", "eating" and "excretion" share the same quality, in that "inhalation" is "eating of air" and "exhalation" is "excretion of air", and thus, we are left with fewer aspects.

1. Movement
2. Sensing
3. Growth
4. Excretion
5. Eating
6. (Nutrition)

Had you thought that "Growth", as a broad concept, includes the results of processes coded in the rest as natural consequence, and thus is redundant?

1. Movement
2. Sensing
3. Excretion
4. Eating
5. (Nutrition)

Had you thought that "Nutrition" similarly is summarized by "Eating" and "Excretion", if they are thought of as balance at various levels?

1. Movement
2. Sensing
3. Excretion
4. Eating

Had you noticed that "Movement" and "Sensing" both share non-material-ness (i.e., exchange of force)? Had you noticed that "Excretion" and "Eating" both share material-ness (i.e., exchange of matter)?

Why not to summarize that interface in the following terms instead:

1. Input (Eating, Sensing)
2. Output (Excretion, Movement)
3. Force (Movement, Sensing)
4. Matter (Eating, Excretion)

?

// Mom human contact as a service...

Perhaps something like Buurtzorg governing structure be good for such service providers to self-organize into a kind of purposeful movement.

// spreading healthy bacteria between humans

And which would be the healthy ones? (Do we have a database of benign bacteria?). How would the Mom service deliver them? (Benign bacteria in one location may not be benign in another). Or, are you meaning "bacteria" figuratively rather than literally?

From "Symbiotic Earth" movie, I noticed the following:

• Interdependence

• Wholeness

• Feedback Loops

• Leaps

• Recycling (everything is reused)

It seems bacteria don't have to worry about their labour being extracted from under them in the form of rent seeking/ read: parasitic process of paying for shelter or paying rent.

We need to eradicate paying for shelter. Or decouple the housing market from the investment markets.

Lynn Twist inspires me to think about Plenty-Thinking: there's enough for everyone vs some people will be left behind..

Well, by blindly copying the world of jungle, we'll get jungle. Blindly copying nature we would not be truly innovating, so, meta-biomimicriously, I'd think it would make sense using nature's examples as inspiration for thinking by analogy and heuristics, not as the final answer. If we'd go purely the bio-mimicry way, we'd end up with airplanes that flap their wings, and ships that wag their tails.

Regarding the "General Principles" -- how general? At the deepest levels of nature, there are the laws of physics, that we can't escape from, they are just there as given: they tell us what's possible in this world, and neither life nor us with our computers had tried out all the possibilities that those general laws permit. (It's a good question.)

// So, how does symbiosis happen?

From what I understand, it happens as coincidental helpfulness that develops into a mutually beneficial relationship, and occurs in nature sporadically as the probability distributions of needs and capabilities match up like in trade relationships: e.g., plover bird cleans alligator teeth, and gets to eat pieces of food between the teeth (a natural trade!), and certain barriers of trust are achieved either consciously or subconsciously evolved over time. A fun example of symbiosis between dolphins and humans: cooperative fishing. So, symbiosis is a phenomenon of a world or market of multiple players rather than a design decision.

In a sense, trade is a kind of evolved symbiosis, and humanity already uses the idea, and even automates it through advanced market order matching engines. We're having a problem not "how to do symbiosis", but "how to make trade maximally flexible and fair", and I know no examples in nature of that except, perhaps the organism blood, that serves as a market of nutrients and metabolites, with trillions of cells exchanging resources, but the trade orders do not exist there, and it's more like valleys and rivers, with some neuro-hormonal regulation. Corpus callosum could be thought of as a kind of neural signals exchange between left and right hemisphere, coordinating the participation of left and right hemisphere to form a single mind, and interestingly, East and West seem go a similar route through China-US decoupling the supply chains. (Why would left and right hemisphere would need a mediator to do their thing? (one being logical, another artistic) Perhaps because different modes of operation requires different "political system," and then a mediator (a specialized market, like corpus callosum) to integrate their results. Did we bio-mimic, or re-invented this ourselves?

After all, it's not how the solution was found (via bio-mimic or not), but how good the solution is. Answering a question of how to redesign world's markets to make more "coincidental mutual helpfulness" happen, may be an important question.

Good category to think and link ideas further :)