If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

LikeInMind Motivation

Page history last edited by Dmitry Sokolov 4 years, 6 months ago

Go:

Visual Taxonomy

Links

Hide/Show:

Communications

https://www.facebook.com/groups/774241602654986/permalink/2273867829359015/?comment_id=2280388515373613&reply_comment_id=2290745404337924&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D

https://fs.blog/2015/09/munger-worldly-wisdom/

"A few major opportunities, clearly recognizable as such, will usually come to one who continuously searches and waits, with a curious mind, loving diagnosis involving multiple variables. And then all that is required is a willingness to bet heavily when the odds are extremely favorable, using resources available as a result of prudence and patience in the past."

― Charlie Munger

Limits to Growth

to create conditions for cultural change towards Development of Collective Consciousness, ability to communicate, think and act as a one Collective.

Motivation

LikeInMind is influenced by World Brain by Herbert Wales, The Glass Bead Game, System-Thought-Activity Methodology and a number of other works on Collective Intelligence, Noosphere and Conscious Evolution.

Dmitry Sokolov They say that our financial world is going to change from investments of money / capital to investment of labour, in a year or two.

It's to our benefit if we started thinking the new old way, as early as possible:

- Money is our Labour preserved for our Future

`Information and knowledge is probably the best product with the ultimate storage and sharing qualities. That's why I keep working on the holistic ontology, P2P Collective Intelligence platform and Personal Cognitive Assistant. 1m

Probably, the shortest motivation can be built on a need to address all the critical Factors of Collective Intelligence:

Coordination
Cooperation
Collaboration

Therefore, the need in General Collective Memory* with the scale of processes we are trying to coordinate, or wider scale if we are thinking about further development of the Collective Intelligence processes, up to Global scale.

*Memory is fundamental for all other Cognitive Processes and almost indistinguishable from many of them: Correlation of Memory and Intelligence. Without memory we will never be able to achieve the Secondary Consciousness required for the change we anticipate.

Dmitry SokolovGroup Admin That's right Neil, or world is partially chaotic and partially ordered. We have plenty of diversity in our context. What we keep missing is similarity / systemicity / patterns / order. Which is worth of remembering and sharing when applicable.

We keep behaving as if our World is irreproducible and unpredictable. Which is only partially true. We learn and communicate, develop science and technology due to the (partial) reproducibility of the vast majority of the processes we observe and participate in.

Therefore a need in LiM / P2PCI as our collective memory. 1m

I dreamed that people were talking seriously about the potential of harnessing a technological and social nervous system to improve the IQ of our various organizations. What if, suddenly, in an evolutionary sense, we evolved a super new nervous system to upgrade our collective social organisms?

Then I dreamed that we got strategic and began to form cooperative alliances of organizations, employing advanced networked computer tools and methods to develop and apply new collective knowledge.

—

DOUGLAS ENGELBART, ABOUT HIS 1951 EPIPHANY

Three Levels of Aggregation of Learners

The final level of aggregation of the Many is collectives. Collectives are machine-aggregated representations of the activities of large number of individuals. They achieve value by extracting information from the individual, group, and network activities of large numbers of networked users. Commercial examples of collectives include recommender systems such as Amazon’s book recommendations that are derived from aggregating and comparing books I have ordered with the purchases of thousands of others and deriving recommendations for further purchase. There are many so called web 2.0 applications that create value through aggregation and analysis of collective activities such as user clickthroughs (Google Pageranks), information contributions (Wikipedia), photo and video tags and downloads (Flickre, Utube), article evaluations (Digg, SlashDot) and consumer rating services (ratemtyteacher.ca). Collective behavior can be as easy to extract as mere participation on the Net at individual, group or network levels. This data is harvested and aggregated to create collective knowledge. For example storing one’s favorite net resources on a social bookmarking site such as del.icio.us can have individual benefit as the resource can easily be retrieved, organized and managed by that individual owner. These resources, especially when they are aggregated with recommendations from others, could be very useful to group or network members. Moreover, when large numbers of resources are sorted, annotated and rated by many, the resultant resource listing gains considerable collective value." (http://terrya.edublogs.org/2008/03/17/networks-versus-groups-in-higher-education/)

Dmitry SokolovGroup Admin Copied from pMOOC group:

I am focused on LiM/P2PCI because can't see an alternative to collective memory. Which is needed for Global Sustainability.

And I can't see many of us who's "business" is GS.

Who's business is Global Sustainability? I can't see them not only because there is no Global Subject but also due to the lack of Collective Memory in planetary scale. Those two, Global Subject with Collective Consciousness and Collective Memory are interdependent and interdefine each other.

Your thoughts?

How to move GS forward?

Micro-projects are good but yet to be coordinated in Global scale... 1m

Dmitry Sokolov M Ichael, the trick is to add, not to change anything in their ways of doing business. They will be asked: would you like to put this selected piece of text or image under what topic from the list?

As simple as that. Nothing new to learn, or very little, as little as possible.

I still don't know who will be the users. It's for all who are working or using information. I've seen Thor's comments somewhere else. Will have to read them carefully.

The problem is same as with first planes or cars: who were they built for?

May be the answer for The Core will be: the Core is needed to those who would like to capture chunks of knowledge to be found in seconds and discovered in minutes? Shared globally? Those who need to find like-minded people based on the knowledge they produced rather than by a chance?

Sorry, just my head isn't working well in this direction. 55m

M Ichael Josefowicz Peter Jones Poor memory? As the Master Connector you are, it seems to me you have an awesome memory for people, what they are interested in. My hunch is that if Dmitry Sokolov could automate your memory he would have a killer application.

It goes to my little soapbox that knowledge is embedded in the people in our networks. Imagine a memory organized by people. Consider each person a bounded network that includes words, articles, objects and movements that make tacit knowledge explicit. Once explicit it is a memory that other people can access.

I still imagine the thortspace dynamic table of contents for a pMOOC. That could be perfect interface of collective memory. The links in each person as sphere could work the same way a badge works. My sphere would have the visual of Mr.Natural. Click on it and it will take you to everything I've done. I still think that people are what they have done, not the stories they tell themselves about how they are.· 10h

Dmitry Sokolov M Ichael, that's the purpose of The Core, to help Peter and other people to collect right knowledge and structure it, for visibility by others and themselves too.

It a personal assistant who seems being "my reflection". Who knows what I need better than I myself.

Don't treat it literally of course. The AI "slave" shouldn't be really more clever than his "master".. :)

That's the image I have in my mind: a best version of myself. 2m

Dmitry Sokolov Lynn, I absolutely agree with "to get our egos out of the way and submit ourselves to the laws of nature, rather than trying to impose upon nature the grand visions of anyone" and the rest of the post too.

I see our collective memory as a scaffold which can be used by a vine to climb where "the solution" is. Different branches will find their ways to the conditions better for them. And with the main purpose to keep the vine bush alive and happy. :)

I share your understanding that math and other formal sciences are too far from the real life. However, without them, the vine may not even survive...

Same with our collective memory. Our world is trying to find it's ways to survival without much of success. And knowing a bit about cognitive processes, we can tell why. I still can't find a better model than "The Kid", a model describing our present status together with being constructive, i.e. showing the elements missing from our sustainable development.

"The scaffold" is not a set of rules to follow but a collection of best practices to consider at solving global problems by the means available locally. It is also needed to keep a bigger picture in our minds, at "zooming out" from our views limited by our human nature as individuals. I agree, no a single person can have comprehension at full details. It's even not physically possible if we consider every bit of information consuming a tiny quantum of energy. We have to rely on expertise of others. And you are right, for being able to reply on others, we have to trust them and remove our ego and other biases from their way.

Experts and people with very diverse experiences are those "nails" that keep "the scaffold" from falling apart, and those who we can rely on at both building "the memory" and solving the local problems.

We connect people by connecting their knowledge... September 8 at 1:07pm · Edited

Internet is the collection of dynamic content of any relevance and value in the respect to the current mental activity of individual or a group. Search engines cannot guarantee the reproducibility of the search queries in time and for the other conditions fixed. Research, or finding particular information may take days if not months.

Mental space contains dynamic networks of images irreproducible identically in time (Irreproducibility of Mental Activities). Information in individual mental spaces can be found in seconds, or in a few days in the worst case.

Projects may take time ranging from a number of days to a number of years. The efficient projects are based on the decision made within shortest possible time. Time-Critical Decision Making is frequently the result of the group activities of experts from different fields of knowledge with the time constant of seconds. The information can be collected during years of time to be efficiently delivered in seconds. The single entry point knowledge network for collection and blending of individual mind maps and other information resources (Signals - Data - Information - Knowledge - Wisdom) does not currently exist.

"Imagine the economic consequences, the beneficial environmental impact, if mankind took up a scholastic, self-reflective mentality, in which knowledge is the highest value artifact, while “owning” physical artifacts beyond a personal capacity to use them or having excess money is considered unethical. There is a growing number of people for whom such values would be far from alien." - World Brain 2
Real-Time Findability of Data, Knowledge and Information of particular interest at given moment of time, for immediate reuse in projects and everyday life
Connecting People by Connecting Their Knowledge
Systematic and Systemic Building The Body of Knowledge
The aim of LikeInMind is to provide Unified Conceptual Space for Self-Organising Teams studied by Global Brain Institute and other Collective Intelligence Groups. This would help us to anticipate Global Changes and to direct them towards the most desirable outcomes—while as much as possible steering clear of dangers and negative side effects. By disseminating our insights and recommendations to scientists, decision-makers and the wider public, we hope to effectively influence these developments. In this way, LikeInMind follows the GBI intends to help the anticipated “Global Brain” organization of the world come about as efficiently as possible, maximizing its positive effects while minimizing any negative ones. (Global Brain Institute: Strategic Objectives and Activities)

Gary Flake, CEO of Clipboard

04:13 if you come up with the best way of

04:14 allowing someone to save something from

04:15 across the web that will naturally

04:17 translate into a mechanism for them to

04:20 save their digital identity over the

04:22 course of a lifetime so we go from

04:23 something that's really small and simple

04:25 very small feature to something that

04:26 actually could be groundbreaking in

04:29 terms of its importance of boredom pains

04:30 on the web and helping to kind of you

04:33 know to kind of get people to think

04:34 about that that whole continuum of what

04:36 clipboard can be is I think the biggest

04:38 challenge

...

one thing that's a that's

08:10 a great concern for me is as a user I

08:14 see a pattern that we've seen that began

08:16 on the web now become amplified and

08:19 mobile and it kind of scares me a little

08:20 bit. that pattern is we see big

08:23 services emerging that are trying to

08:26 create data silos for everything that

08:28 they do so you you know Facebook has

08:30 effectively become almost like a single

08:32 sign-on and the like button is almost a

08:34 universal like button now and

08:37 and yet that's not indexable data they

08:40 don't even really give you any sort of

08:42 search experience on top of your own

08:43 things that you're posting and so so the

08:46 the issues of creating data silos and

08:49 the difficulty of getting things in and

08:51 out on behalf of the users is a big

08:53 concern when you then take that and push

08:56 that into the context of mobile instead

08:58 of they're just being big services like

09:00 Facebook and Google and Apple and Amazon

09:02 and Microsoft that are creating data

09:06 silos it's now every application every

09:08 application is its own data Island and

09:10 one of the reasons why we worked so long

09:13 and hard on this on this you know iphone

09:15 app that we release is we wanted to try

09:17 to break down the silos a little bit and

09:19 so I'm really excited that we may

09:21 actually have the very first iphone app

09:23 that cuts across those data silos to a

09:26 certain extent so so you could use the

09:29 New York Times Reader which is a which

09:31 is a you know dedicated native app on

09:34 iOS and you can select the apportions of

09:38 a story and then paste at the clipboard

09:40 just like you could grab things from a

09:43 mail message or things from a search

09:45 result or a web page or you know notes

09:47 and actually save those to your

09:48 clipboard so being able to cut across

09:50 the data silos is I think an essential

09:52 thing and so the trend that you speak of

09:54 is I don't know what's going to happen

09:56 but the importance of the boundaries of

09:58 those data silos

...

13:38 well for me I as a user and I you know

13:43 I've been using the internet and the web

13:47 in particular for over 20 years and it

13:50 was just simply astonished that the

13:52 state of copy paste when it comes to web

13:56 content and being able to share those

13:57 things which has fundamentally broken I

14:00 mean just to kind of put like a very

14:03 crisp example if you were researching

14:06 something that required to search

14:08 results or two portions of web pages

14:10 from two different sites there was not a

14:13 single website in the world where you

14:14 could actually aggregate those two

14:16 things in one spot you know really the

14:18 best is the second best way of being

14:22 able to approach that it's probably

14:23 pasting into a word document or into

14:25 google documents or an email client and

14:27 so that just felt very broken and I want

14:30 to be able to come up with a

14:34 better solution you know first selfishly

14:36 for myself but then you know hopefully

14:38 something that would resonate with a lot

14:39 of other people so just wanting to solve

14:42 a very basic need that was the whole

14:44 motivation

I suspect there will be others asking about other groups - here's a short list:William Charlton

P2P - https://www.facebook.com/groups/p2p.open/

P2P Research Clusters - https://www.facebook.com/groups/322508360006/

Reinventing Organizations - https://www.facebook.com/groups/393509794147244/

Reinventing Democracy (RSA) - https://www.facebook.com/groups/234224577032504/

Reinventing Work Network (RSA) - https://www.facebook.com/groups/rsarwn/

Enlivening Edge Community - https://www.facebook.com/groups/enliveningedge/

There are many more with very similar ideals, aspirations and more relevant to this thread - needs.

The needs I see again and again are:

The need to connect and collate connections and resources - especially collaborative tools - that work.

The need for real support from others

The need for a solid decision making process

The need for some way to gain financial support - prior to and in the absence of the establishment of a viable alternative economic model

The need for coherence and clarity of vision

The need for an organisational structure/framework/architecture/ethos that supports the above and militates against the drift to the "old ways" e.g.: hierarchy, my baby syndrome, de-facto leaders, competition etc etc etcP2P

5,707 Members 2 hrs

Innovation Model proposed at How Companies Strangle Innovation – and How You Can Get It Right

With love and respect... "the problem with LiM development is the team." is not quite right from my perspective. There is still a problem with the general approach. As we have discussed before if LIM were organized by passionate project owners who are active on FB or twitter, I bet you would have all the volunteers you need.M Ichael Josefowicz Dmitry Sokolov

`It goes to comment. "The definition of 'distributed' information -- a characteristic of 'wicked' problems is that it is not yet documented, and must be gathered from people affected or concerned 'out there' as the discourse develops -- new ideas for dealing with it will require different information." Quite so. "people affected or concerned is the same as what I call a "passionate project owner." Taleb would call it "skin in the game. " If there is no skin in the game, it just becomes a resource for academics.Thor Mann

`Imagine if you could find passionate project owners active on FB and twitter that where involved in figuring the most practical thing they can do in a specific context. I keep turning it over and over and keep coming to the same conclusions.

1. This is something Google does not do and probably has no interest in doing.

2. It would make a real contribution to the problems the world is facing today and will be facing for the next twenty years.

3. The links that come up in orchestrated conversations would separate a valuable signal from a lot of noise.

11 mins

Dear Thor, thank you very much for your thoughts..Dmitry Sokolov

I would need to touch the fundamentals again which are very much in line with your ideas:

- anything a human deals with has an informational component / aspect

- any information flow can be broken in chunks

- size and content of chunks of information depends on the purpose / application of those chunks

- chunks can be interconnected in any particular way that make sense / practical by any particular user of this chunks of information

- the chunks and links, above are reflected in our minds as associative networks

http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../Atomized...

Atomisation of information for reuse is an old idea, and not just my idea: http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../Anything%20Is...

Because of "locality" issues, any classification can be criticised, any previously atomised information can be reconsidered / re-atomised, i.e. integrated and broken in pieces again. Participants are free in both following "classification" (which is no more than a personal associative network) or creating a new one, as close to the purpose of classification as practically needed and possible.

The problem of finding information is a problem of classification. The search engines are "thinking" (for us!) where and how to atomise the texts available on the Web to deliver namely those pieces that are as close in their meaning to our intents / query as possible. I.e., we are happily delegating this classification tasks to machines but reluctant to the results of classification done by humans. But why we decide that a machine knows our particular situation better than a human who was in this or similar situation before? Should that mean that we are giving up our natural intelligence and our ability and need to communicate with fellow-humans and start relying entirely on machines?

If not, then we have to find a way of quick location of like-minded or knowledgeable people who have that experience and are willing to share. Here, we are coming to the fundamentals of human society: democracy vs dictatorship of the "search engine managers". We are coming to a NEED to share to remain humans.

LikeInMind is one of the ways of finding (not searching!!) relevant chunks of information prepared by our fellows for probably other but similar tasks. And taxonomy / ontology here is a "microscope of meaning" allowing to zoom in/out around the area of our particular interest, in order to locate the missing chunks of information as quick as possible. Once located, those chunks of information can either be reused, or can lead us to the authors of that information who are most likely the experts in that particular field.

That's how "" byWe Connect People by Connecting Their Knowledge

- resonating the chunks of information left by people with the ideas in our heads

- contacting with the "owner" of that information

- interaction around "the problem", resonance of ideas of "learners" and "experts" at the process of knowledge transfer, problem solving or emotional exchange, any kind of interaction

Making the parallels with the fluorescence microscopy, for example, we may have at least two strategies after putting the specimen on the stage:

- put the magnification you need for the observation

- focus in the shiny bits on the slide

- decide whether what you see is what you need

- either capture or zoom out, shift the specimen to locate another shiny bit and repeat the process at zooming into those bits that look similar to what is needed

the other one:

- start from the magnification low enough to see the overview of the whole specimen

- start zooming into those areas that look the most similar to what we are looking for

- stop zooming in/out and shifting as soon as the required shiny bit is found

I don't really care what namely structure those bits are included under the microscope. I am free to follow the structures and capture them, or ignore, add another dye and visualise another kind of structures. The structures can be thought as either artefacts and ignored, or not even detected, or thought as a feature and highlighted. It's my will and my responsibility of a researcher to accept relevant and reject noise. Machines and tools can be helpful only when I know what they are designed for, because if misused, they can also create misleading artefacts.

On LiM we create structures to help in locating experts and opportunities to people meeting each other and share by the means of resonating knowledge an ideas. As soon as found, it's a free will to participate or not, to use the old or develop new knowledge based on our previous experience of newly developed.

. We help finding people by zooming in/out the areas of their expertise.We Connect People by Connecting Their Knowledge

Sorry for the long text too. It's probably normal for the emerging paradigm where no common associations are yet to be formed.

· · · LikeReplyRemove PreviewJust now

Excellent, !Dmitry Sokolov Barry

Now we may need to think "(dynamic) networks" as probably a better way of organising information, actors and their intents.

Next will probably be the "locality" where those networks are organised, active and accessible.

After all resources, actors and intents are mapped and overlaid, we may see gaps and disrupture in layers. Those gaps will be either filled by the patterns previously learned from similar situations, or not.

That's where the libraries of patterns and pattern languages would be invaluable. At the moment, there is a disrupture within the "community" of pattern and pattern language experts probably caused by misalignment of their intents. Those experts are not able to start talking with each other to create a unified library of patterns and start working on metapatterns, for example, or just to create an easy access to any relevant pattern as soon as needed. "As soon as" is critically important in certain areas of application of intelligence.

LiM can be thought as a "logical" / "semantic" overlay helping organise information in any imaginable way, make resources, actors and intents not only visible but also accessible within shortest possible time.

For example, this page was found within 20-30 seconds: Pattern Databases

The experts in this particular topic are just 2-3 clicks away from the page. The intents of the experts is not captured. However, we can be sure that they are not aligned due to the fact of all of them working separately from each other.

· · · Like

Remove Preview

3 hrs

Thank you ,Gene

we should, probably talk about .barriers to knowledge sharing

"only if one finds something relevant" is, probably, the key phrase here.

We all live in our "localities", trying to modify them and make suitable to our comfortable life, as much as we can. Naturally, we come to the practice of localising our knowledge within a few platforms: Kumu, PBWorks, DabateGraph, etc., and that is a great step forward from keeping our knowledge for just ourselves and sharing only with those who happened to be near.

The boundaries / barriers, as I can see them currently, are:

- individual mind + individual memory + selected ( = limited) physical locality, a natural way of storing and processing knowledge exchanged as far as our locality can expand,

through

- individual mind + individual web space + selected ( = limited) (virtual+physical) locality,

- selected by principles of "resonating ideas" ( = limited) "collective mind" (of like-minded people) + integrated web space (where ideas are stored for quick and reliable access for immediate reuse, including mulling) + selected locality

`I see us currently working in individual web spaces. Our ideas are defined by our localities, including newsletters and forums. However, due to limitations of our "processing power", we can focus only on those sources of information that "resonate" the most. The only way I can see all our information resonating with all potential participants is to have that information broken on Topics and published on a "right page", to be found and reused by those who need it.

To be found quickly and reliably, it either should be published in an "integrated web space" with a "single point of access" (only one page for each Topic with the same meaning), or interlinked with such page if published somewhere else, so called Transmedia approach by Michael Josefowicz. While technically different, both options are conceptually same: "Unified Conceptual Space", UCS.

I believe, UCS is needed due to limitations in "processing power" of each of participants to track all possible events taking place at every "individual web space".

`My current locality, for example, is a SkillMatcher project at Palmerston North, New Zealand, with the "virtual" location on LiM. My vision is obscured by my current tasks and my individual "processing power".

"only if one finds something relevant" means "almost never" in my current situation. I can find "something relevant" only if it is visible in my locality, that is currently SkillMatcher + LiM + selected FB groups (NSMM) + most critical emails. Unfortunately, I am not able to keep Kumu in the field of my vision. I hope, the situation will change in future though.

Great point. The ADDIT Together process is highly replicable. In my view, replicable is different from blind repetition. I think the idea of replication would help reconcile the two ideas. I don't know if you are approaching this from a capability maturity model type perspective. As an example, I asked today, "We want to improve our review practices, what do you think we should do?" Interestingly, he started with the four Shaping Success ideas (these are relatively new in the model, and he has heard me talk about the Six Cs and ADDIT Together a lot longer). At the same time, when I started writing about my logo experience, I also zoomed in on those four activities, particularly initiating. But when I was writing the Picasso Einstein case, I found myself starting from ADDIT Together. Blind repetition implies doing the same thing in exactly the same way in all situations. But replication in my view is context-sensitive. I am beginning to articulate when different parts of the model would be better starting points, and different ways of navigating the canvas. The framework is "context agnostic but skillful use means crafting just the right process at the right time for the right people. Ties in with 's observation: "A context agnostic framework makes it a lot easier to design just the right process for just the right people at just the right time." Similarly, with 's DSRP - I think it is highly replicable but sometimes Metamaps may be the way to go, other situations DSRP language might be better, and the tactile tool might be work better in other situations.Dasaratha Rama Dmitry Ananth M Ichael Derek

· · · · Unlike

1 hrEdited

: "Publishers will continue to fight self learning, since they can never print the diversity of someone's brain.Peter Jones

Instead of trying and failing to fit us, they seek instead to fit us into their pre defined, stereo typed, tired old skills model, 150 years out of date, and fit for the industrial age, and not for the connected age.

Mean time we are fed the lie that it's good for us to be homogenised through the sausage machine, because that is controllable. And highly profitable.

Sadly the tactic of divide and rule is then used to distract the populous from the creeping feudalism that continues to strangle creatives thinking in schools.

Whereas, the internet is much more like a neural network ...

If we understand this point, do we not have a responsibility to stand as sentinels and direct traffic, to help encourage and support the diversity that is each and every individual human being?

Should we not be championing producerism, instead of consumerism?

Should we not be creating those projects that make real changes in these situations?

If we put platforms in place for people's to come to, and define roles for them to help, can we make it easier for folk to believe there actually are different ways forward, and that through local action, their small difference will actually combine to make a bigger difference?

Along the lines of the whip lash phenomena?"

, just a thought, when all information is overwhelming, supposing for example you could see the true inter connectedness of all our systems, and if you look through the entire collection of you will see what I mean, then it might be tricky knowing where to start ...Peter Jones Dmitry Lee Arnold

`, how would this be dealt with?M Ichael

· · · Unlike

1 hr

, this problem was addressed years ago in semiconductor microelectronics industry for fixed networks structures. The name of the principles was "silicon design", or "silicon computing", I can't remember already, sorry.Dmitry Sokolov Peter

Schematics are built of blocks of elements. Each element is built of other elements of sizes and functions significantly different from the blocks / elements of higher level (of integration), and so forth.

To consider complex problems, we have to abstract ourselves from the irrelevant details. Those are principles of complexity management, to my understanding. The problem is in detecting critical elements of systems in dynamics that is often the case in complex business and socio-economical systems, a problem of so called femtorisks:

http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../10445.../Femtorisks

To address those problems, we need a tool/method to break an information silo into meaningful blocks, find dependencies between them and reconnect those blocks in meaningful models. The models must be as detailed and complex as the actual problem requires and as simple as possible for our "processing power" of a decision making body.

`The decision making is limited by time, processing power and depth of consideration / degree of complexity considered:

of Frustrationhttp://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../37083554/Triangle

· · · Like

Remove Preview

36 mins

In time-critical situations, those win who canDmitry Sokolov

- collect adequate amount of information (not too much too, as time is limited!),

- break it into sensible chunks (atomisation),

- interconnect them into models as adequate to the actual processes as possible (better if confirmed "experimentally", based on measurements and trials)

- "slide" up and down the scales of complexity a few times faster than characteristic time of events is.

`The problems here is limitations of our analytical "processing power" at all stages of decision making process:

- collecting information

- atomisation

- integration

- estimation of competitive / complementary "alternatives"

- decision

`In actual situations, however decisions are often made as based not on pure logics, above, but on the "feeling of satisfaction", intuition, etc.:

http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../Wholeness...

Sometimes even contrary to the "logical" arguments ("gut feeling"). So, I would not, probably stress on analytics too much.

· · · Like

Remove Preview

14 mins

I still believe that without collecting information and analysing it, we have no factual background for our decisions. Our "processing power" can be increased by collective intelligence practices, when like-minded participants synchronise their efforts in co-working in an environment providing highest possible degrees ofDmitry Sokolov

- visibility

- connectivity

- communication,

each following based on the previous component. Connectivity is impossible without visibility of components / participants to be connected, etc.

From my experience, we are still on the "pre-visibility" stage. Each of us is collecting information individually, connects randomly and communicates by a chance too. If we think of those processes have probability, the overall "collective intelligence" process will also have probability equal to the product of probabilities of every step in this process.

The latter should give us an idea on the potential power of our collective intelligence. It's huge!

`All above is the motivation of LiM as a Collective Intelligence platform:

http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../LikeInMind...

, thank you for the opportunity to develop this node of knowledge further.Peter

, , ?M Ichael Bob Esteban

https://www.facebook.com/groups/125513674232534/permalink/876176262499601/?comment_id=895629690554258

I understand your approach, but there is another value that I find much more compelling. The wiki is a place to conduct open source research. It is also a place that can allow one to watch a project in progress and see the associated readings. I share quesion "And, why is a 20 sec search in your LikeInMind system to be preferred to searching other systems, some wiki, Wikipedia, or google, that are faster, and typically even yield better results?"M Ichael Josefowicz Dmitry Sokolov Helmut Leitner

I mentioned before that if I were doing an MA or PhD, your site would be invaluable. Of course I could set up a wiki to keep the research filed, etc. But that does not allow sharing the research with diverse people from around the world who share the same interests.

This page is an example of what is possible.

http://confocal-manawatu.pbworks.com/.../World%20Brain%202

, "Universities create new knowledge in a free market of ideas"Dmitry Sokolov M Ichael

It's a pain to see those created knowledge and ideas circulated in Universities network, in the best case. Most of them die in the labs they "belong to" and with their authors. Just some, "most significant" (for the author?) get into the journals and other media.

I can't see the "free market of ideas" for the same reason,

"not found" or "not discovered" = not (re)used

I also like your idea of publishing papers of non-academics. Science generate huge amount of data that professionals will never have chance even to look at. One of my colleagues is still "living" on data captured about 10 years ago. smile emoticon

That's in particular the reason for drop of interest to physics and other "classical" science, a gap between technical capabilities and "processing power". I believe, science would make another "revolution" if made the "knowledge generation" process transparent, open and inviting to the massive participation. It's time for citizen science, open research and similar initiatives. It's time finally to stop "playing science" by "the most clever" but switching to systemic and systematic processing of data we have in hands already now.

One of the axioms of Knowledge Management, we never know where the "right ideas" are coming from. All ideas must be collected, and the authors of an ideas are the most motivated to have it registered and processed, to be surely found/discovered and reused as soon as needed, not only by themselves but by their colleagues and other researchers through the whole field of human knowledge. Until that happened, until the Global Body of Knowledge is not started being built, I will think of myself living in the pre-historic era of Collective Intelligence.

· · · Like

Reply 1

10 hrs

, good timing!Dmitry Sokolov Peter

I just finished watching Ackoff's talk on knowledge vs wisdom and related matters:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/LikeInMind/permalink/1666695306984808/

To my memory, he suggested focusing not on solving problems but following wholistic vision of our future, how it must be. Sorry for my too free interpretation of his words!!

`I can't see the mass production without conventional unification of parts (knowledge in our case) and standardisation of processes (knowledge, of course, again! :) but in slightly different form). (Re)usability is based on unification and standardisation, i.e. ability to match pre-fabricated desired part to where it thought to be used.

When they say "mass production" they mean not screws and bolts but whole products made of those parts, in large quantities.

Same for knowledge. We are trying to produce lots of different knowledge. However, reusability of knowledge is still on the level of artisans. Particular knowledge is difficult to find or discover. When found, "fine fitting and tuning" is still required, to match every particular case. The latter should mean that our "knowledge technology" is yet to be developed.

I believe that Body of Knowledge will be built only when this knowledge technology become available to masses. I hope that this kins of technology, as well as BoK itself, is being developed on LiM.

Links