51 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2023
    1. I'm tempted to say you can look at uh broadscale social organization uh or like Network Dynamics as an even larger portion of that light 00:32:43 cone but it doesn't seem to have the same continuity well I don't you mean uh it doesn't uh like first person continuity like it doesn't like you think it doesn't it isn't like anything to be 00:32:55 that social AG agent right and and we we both are I think sympathetic to pan psychism so saying even if we only have conscious access to what it's like to be 00:33:08 us at this higher level like it's there's it's possible that there's something that it's like to be a cell but I'm not sure it's possible that there's something that there's something it's like to be say a country
      • for: social superorganism - vs human multicellular being, social superorganism, Homni, major evolutionary transition, MET, MET in Individuality, Indyweb, Indranet, Indyweb/Indranet, CCE cumulative cultural evolution, symmathesy, Gyuri Lajos, individual/collective gestalt, interwingled sensemaking, Deep Humanity, DH, meta crisis, meaning crisis, polycrisis

      • comment

        • True, there is no physical cohesion that binds human beings together into a larger organism, but there is another dimension - informational cohesion.
        • This informational cohesion expresses itself in cumulative cultural evolution. Even this very discussion they are having is an example of that
        • The social superorganism is therefore composed of an informational body and not a physical one and one can think of its major mentations as collective, consensual ideas such as popular memes, movements, governmental or business actions and policies
        • I slept on this and this morning, realized how salient Adam's question was to my own work
          • The comments here build and expand upon what I thought yesterday (my original annotations)
          • The main connections to my own sense-making work are:
            • Within our specific human species, the deep entanglement between self and other (the terminology that our Deep Humanity praxis terms the "individual / collective gestalt")
            • The Deep Humanity / SRG claim that the concurrent meaning / meta / poly crisis may be an evolutionary test foreshadowing the next possible Major Evolutionary Transition in Individuality.<br /> - https://jonudell.info/h/facet/?max=100&expanded=true&user=stopresetgo&exactTagSearch=true&any=MET+in+Individuality
              • As Adam notes, collective consciousness may be more a metaphorical rather than a literal so a social superorganism, (one reference refers to it as Homni
              • may be metaphorical only as this higher order individual lacks the physical signaling system to create a biological coherence that, for instance, an animal body possesses.
              • Nevertheless, the informational connections do exist that bind individual humans together and it is not trivial.
              • Indeed, this is exactly what has catapulted our species into modernity where our cumulative cultural evolution (CCE) has defined the concurrent successes and failures of our species. Modernity's meaning / meta / polycrisis and progress traps are a direct result of CCE.
              • Humanity's intentions and its consequences, both intended and unintended are what has come to shape the entire trajectory of the biosphere. So the impacts of human CCE are not trivial at all. Indeed, a paper has been written proposing that human information systems could be the next Major System Transition (MST) that could lead to another future MET that melds biotic and abiotic
              • This circles back to Adam's question and what has just emerged for me is this question:
                • Is it possible that we could evolve in some kind of hybrid direction where we are biologically still separate individuals BUT deeply intertwingled informationally through CCE and something like the theoretical Indyweb/Indranet which is an explicit articulation of our theoretical informational connectivity?
                • In other words, could "collective consciousness be explicitly defined in terms of an explicit, externalized information system reflecting intertwingled individual/collective learning?
            • The Indyweb / Indranet informational laminin protein / connective tissue that informationally binds individuals to others in an explicit, externalized means of connecting the individual informational nodes of the social superorganism, giving it "collective consciousness" (whereas prior to Indyweb / Indranet, this informational laminin/connective tissue was not systematically developed so all informational connection, for example of the existing internet, is incomplete and adhoc)
            • The major trajectory paths that global or localized cultural populations take can become an indication of the behavior of collective consciousness.
              • Voting, both formal and informal is an expression of consensus leading to consensual behavior and the consensual behavior could be a reflection of Homni's collective consciousness
      • insight

        • While socially annotating this video, a few insights occurred after last night's sleep:
          • Hypothes.is lacks timebound sequence granularity. Indyweb / Indranet has this feature built in and we need it for social annotation. Why? All the information within this particular annotation cannot be machine sorted into a time series. As the social annotator, I actually have to point out which information came first, second, etc. This entire comment, for instance was written AFTER the original very short annotation. Extra tags were updated to reflect the large comment.
          • I gained a new realization of the relationship and intertwingularity of individual / collective learning while writing and reflecting on this social annotation. I think it's because of Adam's question that really revolves around MET of Individuality and the 3 conversant's questioning of the fluid and fuzzy boundary between "self" and "other"
            • Namely, within Indyweb / Indranet there are two learning pillars that make up the entirety of external sensemaking:
              • the first is social annotation of the work of others
              • the second is our own synthesis of what we learned from others (ie. our social annotations)
            • It is the integration of these two pillars that is the sum of our sensemaking parts. Social annotations allow us to sample the edge of the sensemaking work of others. After all, when we ingest one specific information source of others, it is only one of possibly many. Social annotations reflect how our whole interacts with their part. However, we may then integrate that peripheral information of the other more deeply into our own sensemaking work, and that's where we must have our own central synthesizing Indyweb / Indranet space to do that work.
            • It is this interplay between different poles that constitute CCE and symmathesy, mutual learning.
            • adjacency between
              • Indyweb / Indranet name space
              • Indranet
              • automatic vs manual references / citations
            • adjacency statement
              • Oh man, it's so painful to have to insert all these references and citations when Indranet is designed to do all this! A valuable new meme just emerged to express this:
                • Pain between the existing present situation and the imagined future of the same si the fuel that drives innovation.
      • quote: Gien

        • Pain between an existing present situation and an imagined, improved future is the fuel that drives innovation.
      • date: 2023, Nov 8
  2. Dec 2022
    1. Drawing from negativity bias theory, CFM, ICM, and arousal theory, this study characterizes the emotional responses of social media users and verifies how emotional factors affect the number of reposts of social media content after two natural disasters (predictable and unpredictable disasters). In addition, results from defining the influential users as those with many followers and high activity users and then characterizing how they affect the number of reposts after natural disasters
  3. Aug 2022
  4. Mar 2022
  5. Jan 2022
  6. Nov 2021
  7. Oct 2021
    1. Academia: All the Lies: What Went Wrong in the University Model and What Will Come in its Place

      “Students are graduating into a brutal job market.”

      The entreprecariat is designed for learned helplessness (social: individualism), trained incapacities (economic: specialization), and bureaucratic intransigence (political: authoritarianism).


      The Design Problem

      Three diagrams will explain the lack of social engagement in design. If (in Figure 1) we equate the triangle with a design problem, we readily see that industry and its designers are concerned only with the tiny top portion, without addressing themselves to real needs.

      Figure 1: The Design Problem

      (Design for the Real World, 2019. Page 57.)

      The other two figures merely change the caption for the figure.

      • Figure 1: The Design Problem
      • Figure 2: A Country
      • Figure 3: The World
  8. Sep 2021
  9. Jun 2021
  10. May 2021
  11. Mar 2021
  12. Feb 2021
  13. Oct 2020
  14. Sep 2020
  15. Aug 2020
  16. Jul 2020
  17. Jun 2020
  18. May 2020
    1. Van den Akker, O., Weston, S. J., Campbell, L., Chopik, W. J., Damian, R. I., Davis-Kean, P., Hall, A. N., Kosie, J. E., Kruse, E. T., Olsen, J., Ritchie, S. J., Valentine, K. D., van ’t Veer, A. E., & Bakker, M. (2019). Preregistration of secondary data analysis: A template and tutorial [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hvfmr

  19. Apr 2020
  20. Jan 2019
    1. This distinction enlightens the reading of thegrowing social media and mass emergency lit-erature for three reasons. First, without it, thisnew literature risks undoing decades of work bysocial scientists who have dismantled the mythsof disaster, with a dominant discourse thatincludes panic and unlawful behavior by victims.But in disasters arising from natural hazards, weknow such behaviors are not typical. Massemergencies arising from criminal behavior canhave a much wider range of collective behaviorbecause the source of the hazard is unknown,unpredictable and perhaps more imminentlydangerous

      Palen and Hughes raise concern about boundaries and classification in mass emergency research. They define crisis as an overarching term that incorrectly generalizes sociobehavioral phenomena during natural and criminal events.

    2. Misinforma-tion arising from natural hazards or exogenousevents might be greater in kind, but less inimpact, with fewer in-common readers as it tra-verses a network that can move a little slowerthan it might in criminal mass emergency events.Because the problem-solving tends to be morediffuse in exogenous events, the same messagemight not reach enough people; in other words,the misinformation might also be thinly diffused.Misinformation in such events is more likely toage out, or not be relevant to enough locations topose a big threat—in other words, all informationin thefirst place is less likely to be categoricallycorrect or incorrect, and as such, it is hard tofindas much value in pursuing the threat of misin-formation in such situations.

      Not sure I entriely agree with this argument that misinformation in natural disaster/exogenous events.

      Mis/Dis-information definitely matters for those affected. (see Neal, 1997 and Phillips work on phases of response for minority groups).

      What about misinformation campaigns during mass migration or other politically-tinged humanitarian crises where the exogenous factor (long-standing war, religious conflict/persecution, colonialism, etc.) is far removed from the immediate crisis? (Think 2015 migration crisis in Europe, Rohingya genocide in Myanmar implications for Bangaldesh).

      Is there a middle ground between endogenous and exogenous hazards?

    3. Wefindendogeneityandexogeneityof haz-ards to be a meaningful distinction in socialmedia in mass emergencies research, one thatreadily clarifies for a range of researchers andreaders who are outside the social science disci-pline. Just as events that arise from exogenousand endogenous hazards differently impact legal,political, health, and other societal systems, so dothey differently impact social media behavior.8With exogenous events, the culprit is beyondreach, and unstoppable. With endogenous agents,the suspect lies within. Therefore, organizingfeatures of the communication are distinctlydifferent, because the source(s) of the problem(s),the nature of their solutions,and the ability forthe perception of the collective control of theoutcomeare different. Online participation focu-ses on in-common salient problems when theyare present; when the problems are lessin-common and must be addressed in parallel, thecrowd organizes in many smaller groupings and,often endogeneity and exogeneity of hazardspredicts this (Palen & Anderson,2016).

      Describes differences in social media response between 2012 Hurricane Sandy (exogenous) and 2013 Boston Bombing (endogenous) mass emergencies.

    4. We make this point because we worrythat the very idea of“social media”flattens themany meanings of“crisis”and“emergency”forwhich social sciencefields have worked to pro-vide insight. For example, because Twitter orFacebook are available for use in any kind ofcrises, it is easy to make these applications thesalient concern, and ask“Is Twitter or Facebookbetter in emergency response?,”rather thanquestion how the very nature of emergencyresponse might beg for different forms of infor-mation seeking and reporting. We refer to thisflattening of communication medium and hazardas thesocial media and crisis confound.

      Definition of social media and crisis confound