Howard Rheingold: Sharing and Caring

howard-rheingold
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Howard Rheingold <howard@rheingold.com> wrote:
I think you are exactly correct about these issues.

On May 17, 2009, at 5:48 AM, grant czerepak wrote:

Hi Howard,

I am almost finished your recommendation, Bastard Culture, and I can only reach one conclusion.

We should make it possible for everyone to set the price of their content as easy as possible.

If you want to share for free, just set the default to zero.  However, if you come up with a goody it should be just as easy to set a price you want.

If Google can make it possible to display and bid on advertising on the scale they have set up, it would be just as easy to make every piece of content on the web valuable monetarily.

What is an ad but a post?

The result would be a global circulation of capital that would make international free trade in information a major contributor to the stimulation of new economies.

Information does not want to be free, Howard.  Information wants to have the price the market will bear.  And you and I and everyone should see the value in sharing (advertising and brand identity) and caring (buying and selling for sustenance).


Grant Morgan Czerepak

Link:

Bureaucracy: Legalism versus Integrity

canadapassport

I discovered a great deal about identity today.

I went to the passport office to renew my Canadian passport.

I was treated very politely and given the necessary form.

I filled it out accurately and completely. Went to the passport officer and presented form, new photos and current passport. She opens the passport and looks at the photo page and says, “This passport is invalid.”

I reply, “I worked in the United States for one year using that passport, the TN1 visa is still inside.”

She says, “You didn’t sign the passport. It’s invalid.”

I think to myself, “I could take the passport outside, sign it and come back in.  In fact, I could take the passport and sign it right in front of her.  There was never a requirement for a witness; it could have been signed by anyone. This policy is retarded.”

She asks me for additional identification. I don’t have a driver’s license because I sold my car and decided I would use public transit. I offer my Social Insurance Card, but the signature has been rubbed off. I offer my birth certificate, but it has no signature. I offer my provincial health card, but it has no signature. I offer my credit card, my debit card and my library card.  I consider my Movie Village card because the signature is laminated.

She takes everything to her manager. She comes back and gives me a slip of paper. “This is the address of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission. They are on the far side of the city. Have them provide you with a photo ID with your signature and fax me a copy.”

I tell her, “I don’t drink.”

She replies, “You don’t have to.”

I jump on a bus and I go across town. I give the MLCC all the same ID that I gave the passport officer. They have me sign a form and in five minutes I have a photo ID with my signature.  Because the signature pad is electronic and does not provide visual feedback as I am writing I find the first name and last name of my signature overlap.  Maybe it is designed to emulate your signature when you are blind drunk.  I’m over 40 and for the first time I have a card that explicitly states I can legally drink alcohol.

I travel all the way back across town to the passport office. I explain that the passport officer required me to provide another piece of identification. I am directed to a special officer. She makes a photocopy of the MLCC photo ID with signature and says, “Thank you, that’s it.”

Can you explain to me what was achieved by my going to the MLCC which cost me an additional $25 when you include bus fare, which couldn’t have been achieved by me simply signing my passport?

I protected one bureaucrat’s legalism by exploiting another bureaucrat’s legalism.  And the bureaucracy doubled its money.

I will have a renewed passport in two weeks.

They call themselves “public servants”, so why is the public required to jump through mindless hoops to make them appear vigilant?

We do these unnecessary and costly things bureaucrats tell us because we are not willing to sacrifice the greater cost of preserving our integrity and the integrity of policy.

Consequently, the bureaucrat keeps her job, politicians maintain the illusion of governance and we all lose.  Time, money, value.

Will my passport protect me and the global community?  Yes.

Did I also perform a mindless ritual?  Yes.

I believe that a healthy society is regulated by public servants.  However mindless observance of regulations by public servants fails both the public and the policy makers.

Anyone who tells you to violate your integrity to preserve theirs has none.  All they are doing is seeking a bigger piece of the pie at your expense.  It’s a measure of bargaining not morality.

Systema: Geodesates, Nodes and Links

“To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” — Isaac Newton

A predominant issue arising from my work is the discovery of the difference between a node and a link.  A node type represents a state type while a link type represents a transaction between state types.  However I am finding there are a limited number of node types (self-ordered states) and link types (self-ordered state actions).

In the diagram below, each polyhedron is a first frequency geodesate and has a unique polytrope/polytype combination.  A polytrope is the number of edges per polyhedron vertex.  A polytype is the number of polyhedron vertexes.  This is not the final version.  I am still working to purify my geodesate concept.

What I am revealing here is that each of the seven Node Types on the Left has only one Link Type on the right.  In the same way that an association is composed of a source node type and target node type, an association is composed of a source link type and target link type.

Here is an example of a homogenous Entity to Entity association:

Here is an example of a hetergeneous Entity to Positity association:

Having considered this it is now possible to conclude that there are a unique set of nodes each with a unique link which can be used to build homogeneous or heterogeneous associations.  In otherwords, each node type can perform only one action type.  It is the reaction type of the target node type that makes the action reaction combination unique in the system.

Let’s look at some examples of node type and link type associations:

  1. To identify a positity, positifies an identity.
  2. To objectify a projectity, projectifies an objectity.
  3. To chronify a chronity, chronifies a chronity.
  4. To projectify a quantity, quantifies the projectity.
  5. To qualify an identity, identifies a quality.

Fourty-nine possible type combinations exist.  I think there are even more types which I will explore with Archimedean Solids and higher frequency Geodesates in later posts.

Systema: Orientational, Decisional, Actual

Orientational
Why – one of the six causalities
Who – one of the six identities within a causality
Decisional
How – one of the six qualities within an identity
What – one of the six quantities within a quality
Actual
Where – one of the six spatialities within a quantity
When – one of the six temporalities within a spatiality

What I have just defined, finally, are the six dimensions of the interrogative hypercube. Six to the sixth power. That’s 46,656 unique combinations.

The temporal, spatial, quantal, qualal, idental and causal entities are each three dimensional, I hazard to guess, because each is a higher level abstraction of the same phenomena. Three dimensional space is an abstraction of three dimensional time; three dimensional quantity is a an abstraction of three dimensional space and so on.