Evri + Twine Evri & Twine join forces! Read more.

Conscious Awareness Conscious Awareness / Items

Watch My Best Talk: The Global Brain is Coming!

Get Feed

Playback of this video requires the latest Quicktime Plugin.

Download the latest Quicktime Plugin.

Please activate javascript to detect your media plugins.

Older browsers, also IE/Mac, are not supported.

Description

This is video of a talk I gave at the Bonnier GRID '08 conference in Stockholm. Basically the TED conference of Scandinavia. This talk is about the future of the Web, the Semantic Web, and the Global Brain. Watch it here. It also covers the future of the media and the role of media in the developing Global Mind. It's my favorite talk out of all the talks I have given. Enjoy!

The other talks and speakers are here.

Comments

  • Public Comments

    • Yihong Ding Yihong Ding
      17 months ago


      Hi Nova,

      It's a great talk. I have just watched it and am impressed by it. Thank you for sharing with us.

      About Singularity and artificial intelligence, Kevin Kelly in his recent article "Thinkism" has a great discussion about it, which is very close to what you have presented.

      http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/09/thinkism.php

      Moreover, I also raised an issue that in fact it is not just humans are improving machines, machines are also improving humans. I think you have also described this vision in your presentation too. Hence it is indeed an exciting prediction about the future. Very much look forward to getting a chance chatting with you in person at some places in near future.

      best,

      Yihong
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • webferret webferret
      17 months ago


      webstar08
      Brain, Mind and Consciousness

    • wildcat wildcat
      17 months ago


      Brilliant presentation, clear, concise and to the point, and a very good introduction to those not quite in the know.
      thank you , I think I express the feelings of many of us when I say that the superorganism, intelligence and collectivity which awaits us is nothing short of a total transformation of human nature.
      what this transformation will herald for our emotional life, conscious awareness and ethics, is still a grand enigma.
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • . .•∞º˙ . .•∞º˙
      17 months ago


      WOW! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TylvUGJIi_w
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • Bent Rasmussen Bent Rasmussen
      17 months ago


      Always nice with dreams. I hope some of the more immediate trends, like location awareness, will come to Twine. It's the basis for any augmented reality - well - at least any spatial augmentation. Maybe Twine can harvest location information itself via a layer on top of it's NL processing module.

      I'm not sure I'd want an ant-like slave culture deprived of individuality. Otherwise I fail to see what's so different from what we have now - albeit with "separated" minds. If our minds become closer, it can't help but change how we perceive ourselves, justice and society, but still, would you want to always be "jacked in"? Somewhere along the line there is the notion of privacy and self and why should we give up our current selves completely for just one larger self? The selflessness of all for the self of one?

      Of course your talk is based upon the premise that the whole world should become one self and that would be a good thing. That leaves just one self - no external contradictions. Technology is a means, not an end. We are not supposed to be slaves of our creations, I think. Even if that creation is a network that subordinates individuals in a global brain. I think there'll form two trends: "jacked in" and "jacked out". One will want to be jacked in some of the time and some time just be free of the noise and just be one self without interference. Societies that wipe out individuality tend to be.... not.... nice.

      Technological optimism. I hope we'll find a balance between blind faith and pure fear.
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

      • Jack D. Logan Jack D. Logan
        17 months ago


        I take umbrage! LOL :-)
        Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

        • 17 months ago


          This comment has been removed.

          • johnrod johnrod
            17 months ago


            Gibson's novel Neuromancer, which started the term cyberspace, was reportedly originally titled jacked in and uses the phrase involving international characters, so it may be possible to find a translation. Thanks.
            http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/science_fiction/neuromancer.html
            http://www.cyberpunkreview.com/wiki/index.php?title=Timeline
            Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

      • 17 months ago


        This comment has been removed.

        • Bent Rasmussen Bent Rasmussen
          17 months ago


          The jacked in/out is just a very visual way to explain the hive mind connectedness switch. [Yes, one can think of much popular science-fiction here, both Star Trek and the Borg collective and The Matrix; It's very superficial comparisons of course - hardly ones we'd use to accurately describe our visions of the future, but ones that can sketch out abstract concerns].

          In my mind the global brain is certainly interesting but at least as interesting is pure machine intelligence. That is the future where intelligence is scalable and we use machines as oracles, a kind of parametric visionaries, that we can feed our common desires for the future and have them figure out the optimal path towards those common desires in a way no human mind will be able to.

          These oracles will also be used to help design a better Neural Internet architechture that ensure certain principles.

          Also, in a hyperadvanced future with scalable intelligence, abundant automation and sustainable energy, we are also much more free to choose than now, where cost is limiting all but the most wealthy to look at earth from space.
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

          • wildcat wildcat
            17 months ago


            first I truly suggest to watch the hive :" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pdTi1ui3I4"

            Truly, the problem lies not with the one machine a la Kelly, or H.Bloom's view, it is the manner in which we understand ourselves as compassionate and highly empathic minds (as our mirror neurons show us to be, whether we like or not), as our collective intelligence emerges, it is in our hands to make it happen in a manner that is open and unbiased in which and by which fiercely independent humans 'choose' the kind of future they desire to participate in. as I see it, the future holds a multiplicity of options, only some of which lead into the hive style. as the economy of abundance will provide for all (via nanonics or the equivalent in biotech), the whole idea of a global brain/mind, will take a whole new meaning. there is no doubt in my mind that through the careful application of our self-understanding (especially with regard to open sourcing everything) the technological singularity will bring with it (or soon thereafter) a Mind singularity, a revolution in self awareness and consciousness, a revolution in our understanding of what freedom means.
            some of us might choose to jack in, others to jack out, others yet to hybridize and become other than that which we currently understand as a 'natural' human, all options are on the table.

            "Also, in a hyperadvanced future with scalable intelligence, abundant automation and sustainable energy, we are also much more free to choose than now"
            definitely so, until such a point in time, in which the cost of energy is zero, cost of work is zero, our emotional/intelligent life will finally be able to launch, infinite choice will reign supreme.

            In a different polylogue here : http://www.twine.com/item/11hgb1b3p-25y/the-gold-mine-exploring-hyperconnected-trust
            one of the participants (FTF) suggested that:"What I think about is rather different then a "collective "we" (as you put it). It will be more accurately phrased as "diverse I". The construct of which is to retain a balance between open edges and a degree of mutual fidelity"
            A very interesting and worth exploring view to my eyes.
            Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • johnrod johnrod
      17 months ago


      This is popular web science. The local site lends the teacher credibility without having to show the math. Here, time is measured from the Now, e.g. posts may be H hours ago, or D days ago. How this will be handled by the SW is another matter. Predictions of post-singularity may be possible if units are chosen that are likely to resemble their current form, e.g. scales much bigger or smaller than what humans currently, and machines eventually, utilize. Thanks.
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

      • 17 months ago


        This comment has been removed.

        • johnrod johnrod
          17 months ago


          Twain: Appreciate the response. These avatars are a type of tag. Your direction may include a metamap based on a profile twine for example. Obviously previous comments are subect to change.

          Nature has evidenced genetic diversity, e.g. species. The global brain may exo-mind around these as described for humans and machines. Add intelligence patterns through convergence of nano/info/bio/cog. Definition of humanity is subject to change. LHC may yield new type of post-web analysis networks and math. The terms may be another language. Perhaps can find (fractal) images of twine-type organizations in the noise which may be artifact of our own perceptions. That is why the steps that led NS & the gang to this site's formulation are interesting as they may represent a human characteristic that will have additional niches. Content for kindle perhaps. Thanks.
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • pomlover pomlover
      17 months ago


      Nice Job Nova.
      Conscious Awareness

    • K P
      17 months ago


      @Nova - I think it's very interesting, but it sounds like prediction of McLuhan. I'm sure you've read "Connected Intelligence: The Arrival of the Web Society" by Derrick de Kerckhove. He uses a term "connected" instead of "collective", but in fact you're talking about the same thing. Note that de Kerckhove wrote his book in 1997.
      Greetings from Poland. I'm waiting for release of Twine.
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • Jack D. Logan Jack D. Logan
      17 months ago


      Nova - you're best talk ever - http://trumpet.sdsu.edu/M408/logan_m408.html - it has implications for everything; congratulations.
      JDL
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • Jack D. Logan Jack D. Logan
      17 months ago


      There's another book on the subject of collective consciousness by the neurosurgeon, Leonard Schlain, which he titles Art and Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time, and Light that argues that long before the Internet a 'global super consciousness' is at work in the affairs of humans that is responsible for the great leaps of creativity in Art, Music, and Physics that have provided humans with new models to perceive themselves and their surroundings - http://www.amazon.com/Art-Physics-Parallel-Visions-Space/dp/0688123058/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223652602&sr=8-4

      Here are two reviews:
      1. http://www.rheingold.com/texts/reviews/artphysics.html
      2. http://www.powells.com/biblio?isbn=9780061227974
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • Phil Duby Phil Duby
      17 months ago


      Long post, covering multiple comments. I included links to (flat version only sorry) the referenced posts for complete contexts.

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_42 (Twain)

      By the time we form the "Global Brain" will it be really optimal
      A (the) global brain does not need to be optimal or efficient to be effective. The other part of the question will it actually be factorially less efficient than the brains of the most intelligent people in the world is a challenge though. Worded another way "can we get *ANY* amplification from the global brain?". If we can get past 1.00000 of the 'best' contributing mind, then we can work on improving efficiency, effectiveness.
      Re: 90-10, 10% usage. I do not think that is an issue. Assuming the 10% usage of existing brain processing power, then we need to get the global brain's 10% from / by combining our 10%'s. Once 'critical mass' is achieved, it should become self sustaining.
      The question is whether or not we can make it to 1.00000 (of the 10%). There is not enough information yet about what the shape of the curve is / will be to make reasonable estimates. How much will raw technology affect the curve? How much will human communications affect it? Can linguistics / communications training change the curve? Too many unknowns still.

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_43 (Twain)

      a Brit but a bore personal opinion, and not really necessary to point out.
      it's not my fault I'm bright and have access to more natural faculties, talents, experiences and skills true. It also not necessary to almost always point out all of your advantages. After the first few times that can (my opinion this time) be boring too. I've seen it enough now, that when I see it start again, I automatically start skimming to try to figure out what your point is, separate from the list of talents.

      I choose to apply my abilities on Twine to advance our journey towards the "Global Brain" and the "Singularity". I like that. I hope to be contributing towards those goals as well.

      borderline ENTP/ENTJ I took a short course on Myers-Briggs years ago. I definitely do not know it enough to understand what that means. we're SMART and take no prisoners. *that* is more useful, although obvious from the history I have seen here. Taking no prisoners *should* not mean it is necessary to bring 'personalities' into the conversation.

      From When I make a decision to being offered to me. excellent strategy. I especially like exercise my brain.
      Excellent, serious goals / targets.

      Now, Hucheng and others getting back into personalities and opinions again here. As above, I don't think it is necessary to keep listing the experiences that the facts / opinions / directions are based on. Sometimes it is needed to provide grounding. Not always. To avoid a lot of repetition, perhaps you could write up a bio in a note or on one of your own websites, with labels / tags / anchors that can be referenced as needed. Something like a footnote reference: "My relevant background for these statements is: [11], [14], [15]" using links to the appropriate bio sections. The previous is just one idea. I can see cases where it would not work as well as would be hoped.
      About the same subject content. The global brain that you / we are targeting needs to account for / be usable by a WIDE range of people. As you pointed out in another thread, gender is [can be] a communications issue, simply because the early C(_) culture was mostly male, techie, engineer types. The same applies here. We need to accept / allow for / USE the differences. In the worst case, the global brain will need to handle *noise* in the system. In the best case, the differences can help balance and power the system.

      "ego perception filters" see http://www.twine.com/item/11jvhg4tw-b1/the-certainty-bias-a-potentially-dangerous-mental-flaw-scientific-american. I think that applies here as well.
      only joke, never met, capable: stereotyping, and perceptions through *cultural* filters. Even in jest, not funny. You may not joke, but I've seen you do some of the same sort of stereotyping to get a point across. Usually gender related.

      An increase in group size can actually increase group IQ I comment on this before. The operative word here is can. There needs to be some sort of group synergy to achieve this result. We need to figure out how to reliably reproduce that, because as implied above about getting to 1.0000, the global brain is going to *need* that same sort of group synergy.
      increase / decrease of group IQ is SITUATIONAL +1
      specifically about corporate teams so I'm specifically accepted. With the qualifier than even *typical* corporate teams can have a lot of *high ego* individuals, that are driven by emotional needs. I can see the potential, given the *right* mix.
      the group leader(s) are definitely a critical component of that mix.

      LIKE TESLA +1 we are just doing (trying to) do some of our thinking out loud, with others, to look for some of those synergies.
      work in progress missing word +1

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_44 (hucheng)

      vast topic requires a lot more thought +1 That what we are (at least should be) working on here, as a group. Sharing thoughts, sparking ideas off of each other.
      qroup mind being dominated by Valid considerations. I don't think narcissists are likely to be *too* much of a problem. One narcissist in a group can become the leader by default / persistence. Getting a bunch of them together should (I hope) tend to cancel them out, as they 'compete' with each other.
      D's are not [necessarily] narcissists. They are just very direct in their interactions with others. Cut to the chase; Just the facts; types. As a part / side effect of that, the things they currently believe to be true tend to be *communicated* as absolute, unalterable facts, even if it is just todays best guess at a working model. It is a communications style, not a personality type. There are overlaps between styles can types, but I do not have enough background to map the spectrums even approximately. Narcisist and type D do not automatically go together in my head though.

      comparisons to ant colonies or bee hives I do not want to be a simple 'worker' either. That is a personal preference. How do the various global, national, regional economies / societies work today though? Many people are filling nitch rolls that allow the 'whole' to continue to function, without much benefit to the individuals. But they are *productive*. I expect the same to be true for the global brain, if / when we manage to create it. Individuals will *fit* where their skills, knowledge, aptitudes, drive allow them to fit. They will *make* their own place among the competing / overlapping requirements of the whole. Given the global context, I expect the movement and barriers to change / improvement to be less than for existing societies. As far as the specific analogies, we are attempting to describe something that does not exist, has never existing (at least that we know of). There is no good / accurate way to describe it. What you see as 'slavery', others might find as simple security. Noone really *knows*. We are all making guesses and [weak] approximations. Have you seen / heard the story about the 5 blind men encountering an elephant for the first time? Depending on the part of the elephant encountered, it gets described as being like a wall, tree, rope, (I don't recall the other 2). All are accurate for the frame of reference. None is sufficient for whole. We are all still blind, fumbling around with small parts of the whole.

      learn more and more about the structure of the human brain but still don't really understand consciousness and creativity I do not believe it is necessary to [completely] understand something to use it. Besides, given the aspects of the global brain being described, it still INCLUDES humans in the mix. We can provide the creative, and consciousness may not be needed.

      I don't trust the view that increasing connectivity and access to information will solve the problem of the IQ in groups Lets look at this from a different way then. About "increasing connectivity and access to information improves the *TOOLS* that people can use, which improves PRODUCTIVITY (effectiveness)"? That is independent of individual or group IQ. It is basically what as driven the industrial revolution, through the information revolution, and still increasing (accelerating?). If we can increase the group IQ (ability to create and manipulate ideas, concepts), bonus. Starting from just better tools to find, manage, manipulate information and data (as individuals and groups) may provide the spark / understanding to get to the next level.

      Your global city, my economy model, Bent's ant colony. All [possible] pieces / perspectives of what the global brain will look like. All pieces of the elephant. All [possibly] correct, none complete.

      Your twitter example: That shows that people to not need to be at the *top* of the pile to contribute.

      problem with a singularity unfortunately is that nobody can predict what happens after it [grin] that sort of is the definition of a singularity. That darn elephant again. Make that a herd of elephants.

      That alone worries me about Nova's vision for Twine. Oh [evil smile], be worried, be VERY worried.
      I'm not worried. Curious yes. On how the mix is going to work out.

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_45 (Twain)

      Actually, ... appears to be accurate information. Did not go reread the linked threads. Could have said the same thing without the emotional labels. I do NOT say softer. Removing the emotional labels can still be quite hard / targetted / direct. Being a type D myself, direct is fine. I would just personally prefer it without the excessive use (either side) of the loaded labels.

      positive force for Twine
      I. [thumbs up]
      II. And it only took 2 of your posts in that thread. I think somebody needed to 'break the ice'.
      III. Sigh
      IV. Of course *some* of those users get punted too.

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_46 (hucheng)

      read my Chinese comment Can't comment. I don't read Chinese, kooky grammer or not.
      a vain attempt Twine *IS* still for the 'bleeding edgers'.

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_47 (Twain)


      Without getting too involved in the details, personal preference and balance.

      http://www.twine.com/item/11xg3g873-xs/watch-my-best-talk-the-global-brain-is-coming?discussion=flat#c_48 (James Todd)


      hmm!!? finally caught up to the end of the thread. How does this post rate/rank? Pretty mixed bag I imagine.
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • James Todd James Todd
      17 months ago


      concern:

      information dilution. this entry, largely sans commentary, is personally very motivating. more contextual contribution is desired.

      source:

      my $.02US

      consider:

      when authoring content that includes an inordinate number of ( i, me, my, you) terms that are not in and of themselves reasonably contextual, consider referencing an external (?web?) link. examples include prototypical "about," "biography" and "rant" (blog) entries, that can reside on any resolvable resource. when consuming content, consider providing feedback that would better help your (personal) experience, hopes and aspirations. examples being, things that work, things that don't work, things that feel important, etc.

      fact:

      stuff happens. systems must and will learn and adapt, striving to re-balance of the "power of influence" (on the system) between information consumers and that of content creators. incremental solutions to this (obvious) objective, like that of "block user," are not (at this time) entirely comprehensive (filters), like the often found and necessary "mute" feature in online games. over time less user driven binary "influence" operations will be required, resulting in a personalized and deeply relevant "natural selection" of information surfacing.

      closing:

      hey, how about that movie? this one? remember? pretty cool huh!
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • . .•∞º˙ . .•∞º˙
      17 months ago


      "I believe that if Michael Wensch came to Twine " sorry--already invited him, he may be reading all this now!
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

      • 17 months ago


        This comment has been removed.

        • . .•∞º˙ . .•∞º˙
          17 months ago


          here--try this one on for size...

          myspace graphics

          or this one for your next 'discussion'

          myspace layouts
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • . .•∞º˙ . .•∞º˙
      17 months ago


      "That is if this isn't a belated April Fool's by our gremlin turned golden carp"--not that there's anything wrong with that... ;-)
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

      • 17 months ago


        This comment has been removed.

        • Jack D. Logan Jack D. Logan
          17 months ago


          I'm a monkey (1944); sorry, and, good fortune hasn't always followed me; but, here I am anyway! And for God's sake, rpfiii, please don't turn me into a monkey on a surfboard under a wave with a cowboy hat, boots, and a kerchief around my neck!!!!!! LOL!
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • 17 months ago


      This comment has been removed.

      • 17 months ago


        This comment has been removed.

        • . .•∞º˙ . .•∞º˙
          17 months ago


          Additional Additional Questions:

          1. What is motivating this move to "one machine"? Is it monetary, philanthropic, or simply inevitable?

          2. Where is the "profit model" that will get us there? Outside of open source technology and programming, most people/businesses don't do ANYTHING that isn't driven by capital gain. I don't want a Minority Report World where every billboard, storefront, sign, and bus shelter is SCREAMING at me to buy/use/consume the next biggest product (See the Disney Movie Wall*E for how frighteningly scary that vision can be--anyone up for the New Blue Drink?). That by itself will be the biggest reason people choose NOT to jack-in. If I can't hear or see all the conflicting messages flooding my cortex, I won't have to try and block them. If people choose not to participate, the motivation towards this kind of future goes away. Unless we have no choice and get borged before we know it. Then it won't matter. Call me CopperTop.
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

        • Phil Duby Phil Duby
          17 months ago


          "Group IQ is not inversely correlated to group size"
          Unfortunately [historically], the IQ of a group is NOT the average IQ of the members of the group. Think mob. It has the IQ of [maybe] a 2 year old having a temper tantrum. Take a professional sports team. The 'team' is not particularly intelligent. The extent that is acts / plays / responds intelligently is determined by the 'play book' that has been memorized and practiced.

          A team in action encountering something 'new' has difficulty adjusting quickly. Individual members can adjust (individual effort), but quick changes [improvements] to the team 'entity' are unlikely without outside direction (the coach sending in a new play, the team captain [individual] giving explicit direction). I think teams can improve their IQ by working / playing / practicing together. The better each member understands the abilities AND limitations of the members, the better the team as a whole can adjust / learn.

          The idea is that technologies and practices that reduce the distance / separation; improve the familiarity, closeness of [online] teams / entities MAY reach a tipping point where the shared knowledge is enough [and updated fast enough] to counter the team IQ reduction based [probably] on the differences and individualism. Teams CAN create output greater than the individuals in it, but that is [as far as I see] due to specialization and mutual support, so that individual members can perform at their own peak (and more), sharing and merging results with the team.
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

        • Nova Spivack Nova Spivack
          17 months ago


          From Wikipedia: Moore's Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

          Since the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958, the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has increased exponentially, doubling approximately every two years.[1]
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • 17 months ago


      This comment has been removed.

      • Phil Duby Phil Duby
        17 months ago


        I took some time and watched a bunch of the Michio Kaku videos on youtube. Like Nova's presentation, not much new, since I have been following the same technologies, their projections, and implications, from other sources. At least till I got to string and M theories. Had not looked at that before. Interesting, but outside of my current 'interest scope'.
        Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • 17 months ago


      This comment has been removed.

      • wildcat wildcat
        17 months ago


        "How free, open and efficient can the "Global Brain" really be if we're going to be pragmatic rather than idealistic about it?"
        brilliant exposition twain, you succinctly condensed the ideal of an endlessly open culture, it will take time and much effort from all of us to change the idea that there exists some a-priori privilege (be it social status, financial status, expertise status and so on) what you are advocating and to which I agree implicitly is nothing less than a complete overhaul of human relations and human norms, in short , you are definitely a revolutionary... (as many of our friends here are)
        as our polylogue in FH(_) proves , if we can create the right conditions of openness and unconditionality both pragmatically and idealistically, the free human can come forward and share/connect/interact/input and so on until we all become more intelligent.
        Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • hucheng hucheng
      17 months ago


      This comment has been removed.

      • Phil Duby Phil Duby
        17 months ago


        Oh dear, oh my, ouch

        Humor does not always get through in C(_) [other thread], and people have a WIDE range of differences on what they find *amusing*. Especially when they are the *target*.

        participate away. I just [very] quietly suggest minimizing [to zero] posts about the people in the conversation, and the way they express their opinions, without even a *nod* to adding to the conversation. You didn't *really* expect that to go past without being challenged did you?

        inclusive? the comments?
        Being educated, passionate, involved sure of yourself does not always mean being right or having covered all of the angles. I attended a seminar a while ago about communications styles. In the assessment that went with that, I show as [very] 'high D' on their charts, one of the traits of which is always sounding positive (sure of your self / information), even if it is only a starting point for discussion. I've been working to tone that down to more *realistic* levels. My *feel* is that Twain is even higher D than I am / ever was. Type D communication is neither 'good' or 'bad'. It is just more appropriate (or works better) in some contexts than others. Oh, and D's usually like *facts*.

        As far as the topic video went, I found it interesting / informative. But then it fit well with *my* preconceived notions, and I saw little reason to comment directly on it. The areas I would take potential exception to, are also areas where I do not have any better information.
        Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

      • 17 months ago


        This comment has been removed.

        • hucheng hucheng
          17 months ago


          Twain the YOU ASIANS was clearly used in an ironic manner. It was to highlight the comments you often make.

          The reference to a user called Twain in one of my blogs had nothing to do with you being a Guru that helped me, just a factual comment that you passed on a link, which was was in the context of my post about Twine. I disapprove of name dropping as a mechanism to "big yourself up" and clearly I wasn't doing that in this context.

          My life is not on the Internet, I have met many Asians male and female, both online and off, and now get involved with entertaining Chinese business clients within my work (I am the only person who can speak Chinese in my office). That doesn't qualify me to make sweeping statements about cultures any more than it does you.

          You last comment is amusing considering I was high-lighting the broad brush you yourself use to address Westerner / Anglo Saxon (you do this often and yes it is arrogant, narrow-minded, patronizing, racist and offensive, actually). Can you really not see this?

          The point of me commenting was simply to highlight the fact that you hogged some of my time again with your relentless boasting and self-promotion. I won't do it again, however I may raise a separate topic. You often go off topic (or off somewhere it is hard to say where for sure.)

          We all have egos but you seem to suggest that Nova encourages you to behave in this way, I was just bemused as to why because I don't appear to be the only user you put off. I can DEAL WITH IT but when you put yourself in that position I have to question what is going on. If Nova really thinks you behavior helps Twine then fair enough but I disagree completly.
          Nova Spivack - My Public Twine

    • hucheng hucheng
      17 months ago


      AGAIN A WHOLE BUNCH OF COMMENTS REMOVED FROM THIS THREAD. So ignore anything that doesn't directly reference Nova's video below............

      My initial over-reaction against Twain can be partly explained by one of her own comments. Unlike Twain I do not see a danger of the group mind being dominated by Anglo Saxon middle-aged males, rather my horror is that the mind will be dominated by narcissists, by the "look at me". It seems that there is a horrible trend for people who are overly sure of themselves or overly self-promoting to fill roles that their talents, abilities and insights do not justify. For example in leadership roles as described here: http://www.twine.com/item/11j6fxtgh-dv/narcissistic-people-most-likely-to-emerge-as-leaders this article ties in well with my experiences of this type of personality, I personally fear that there is a real danger that these nodes in the connections are already having and will continue to have a hugely disproportionate influence on the collective brain. Thanks to Phil Durby I now have another label for these people type D++... in some cases I think the + can be considered recurring.

      Nova's talk focused quite a lot on the connectivity, there were comparisons to ant colonies or bee hives at this point I am pleased to see comments like the one by Bent Ramussen, I too don't want to be part of an ant like slave culture, possibly driven by narccisists and type Ds. Twain would appear to subscribe to this ant colony vision as she cites many historical examples based on religion and legal systems that from my point of view are the very antithesis of a group mind and group thinking. Surely in the case of religion in particular the idea is a group concensus, where independent thinking has often been punishable by death and change in opinion acts at a glacial slow speed. To quote a historical example consider the female mathematician and free thinker Hypatia of Alexandria, killed by a coptic christian mob in the fifth century. Twain's examples from history seem to be driven by types that make her white Anglo Saxon males look positively tame (did you think before you took yet another opportunity to parade your knowledge in front of us, can you just quote Tesla or do you apply it?). At best these systems produce a global consensus, they don't appear to have anything much to do with agile thinking.

      For once I actually agree with Twain the talk is unfinished, it is unfinished because although it highlights the emerging structure and some of the nature of the connections involved in the global brain it does not make any real concrete predictions about how the brain is going to think, the actual mechanism in which it will generate thoughts. This problem is one that still appears to defeat biologists, we learn more and more about the structure of the human brain but still don't really understand consciousness and creativity etc. Highlighting the structure of the global brain doesn't give us these insights either. The more interesting questions about self and identity at the end are left for the listener to answer.

      I don't trust the view that increasing connectivity and access to information will solve the problem of the IQ in groups, mainly because I have not encountered a convincing explanation that proves this (there may be one, I would be happy to read it). If the social group connections don't work this way and if nothing else automatically emerges to do the thinking then the global brain will be retarded. Rather than hope in a fix to IQ problems of groups, why not pursue an alternative model where increasing size does usually result in the increase of innovation and creativity, that model is based on the City. That is where my personal investigations will take me because although I don't understand how this model works yet. I suspect the innovation and creativity increase that comes from increasing size of cities is occurring at interfaces and via friction, not within ghettos and tightly knit groups (linking the ghettos doesn't stop them being ghettos), perhaps we should be looking at the creation of a "global city" rather than a global brain, we can still retain some measure of individualism in this model. Maybe the problem is that many in this field already have a strong investment in social web, it would be ironic if those that currently thought they are at the cutting edge of the imminent global brain actual found themselves in ghettos of the global city (pure speculation on my part of course).

      Maybe the social networks are actually doomed to evolve into echo chambers driven by narcissists, perhaps the real thinking of the brain is to be carried out in the gaps between the networks. There are some tantalizing indications, the kind of activity that occurs via. search.twitter.com, a while ago a friend of mine tweeted a good and original observation on a current affair and it was picked up by a journalist and found its way onto the homepage of a prominent newspaper, my friend who has few 'connections' was none-the-less told of this by one of them. This thought bubbled its way to the top via a different kind of mechanism. I have more examples that are similar.

      A problem with many of these kinds of presentation is that lots of people are pointing and telling us that something is coming over the hill but they don't describe the exact nature of it (it seems the problem with a singularity unfortunately is that nobody can predict what happens after it). There will inevitably be precursors of what is to come in current technology or thought (think Da Vinci, Babbage or the memex machine of Vannever Bush http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2003/09/back_to_the_memex.html), the problem of course is that they may appear insane to us now, this doesn't stop one from searching for them. Maybe just a tantalizing glimpse may be found like the tape found in the attic of Delia Derbyshire listen to the "dance track" sound sample, done on tape-loops prior to synthesisers as an amusing diversion http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7512072.stm, I intend to search but doubt I will recognize it.

      Regarding Twain can anybody hear alarm bells in the above comments? Twain you call me obtuse, well I DON'T think I am more intelligent than everybody else but I certainly haven't seen anything to make me think that you are more intelligent than me. As for a battle I cannot win, on your friend's social network, with your pre-established buddies and your stone-headed inability to actually listen, yeah you are probably right so what? You have said some very stupid things in the past but lucky for you most of them have probably been deleted. I don't have to win anything the web is a big place and I am learning plenty outside of Twine.

      What worries me more is that apparently Nova thinks you are a positive force in Twine, I am not second guessing Nova here just working on what Twain has told us. That alone worries me about Nova's vision for Twine.
      Nova Spivack - My Public Twine
    Add a Comment
Report This

Twine is about discovering, collecting and sharing the content that interests you. Learn More

Stats

First Posted By

Nova Spivack

First Comment By

Yihong Ding

Tags

Community Tags

Who's Interested In This?

Forgot your password?