{"id":1316,"date":"2017-01-10T08:37:49","date_gmt":"2017-01-10T08:37:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.dgen.net\/blog\/?page_id=1316"},"modified":"2024-12-13T09:12:59","modified_gmt":"2024-12-13T09:12:59","slug":"thread-1","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/dgen.net\/0\/thread\/thread-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Thread #1 \u2014 Hello 2017"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n

2017-01-10<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is a great deal to be done before the objects in daily use
\nreach a standard of enlightened design of which we need not feel ashamed\u201d
\n<\/strong>James Stead, my grandfather, maker of things (1901-2008)<\/p>\n

Hello,<\/p>\n

This, the first of my updates, went out to 123\u00a0people\u00a0last week.<\/p>\n

If you want to sign up to future digital and physical mailings, please sign up here<\/a><\/strong><\/span>. Note that mailings will contain additional details that aren’t appropriate for\u00a0public-web posts.<\/p>\n

This is my new experiment to try and create positive impact in the world with the shared expertise of the wonderful people I know, to talk about impact at web-scale, to talk about music and science, and to start conversations that might encourage serendipity. And so it\u2019s not just me shouting into the void, every section has actions. A keyword here is \u2018do\u2019 not just talk.<\/p>\n

I\u2019d also like to send you the limited-run print edition: please let me know which address to send it to (nb: still in design, but the point is that it\u2019s slow). The idea is to keep updating this\u00a0site and do occasional emails, prints and other media, to fit with the fact that we all absorb things in linear and nonlinear ways, and remembering the fact that all media is social media.<\/p>\n

This is the long version [a 22 minute read, if you don\u2019t follow the links]. You can jump into sections below.<\/p>\n

1. Perfect storms: cheerio 2016, hello 2017<\/a> [4 min]<\/p>\n

2. About that whole data thing<\/a> [6 min]<\/p>\n

3. Escape into the multiverse \u2013 acoustic cosmology<\/a> [10 min]<\/p>\n

4. Links that you might find useful or weird<\/a> (aka memepool)
\n[2 min + the rest of the week if you follow the links]<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

1. Perfect storms: cheerio 2016, hello 2017 <\/strong><\/h2>\n

[4 min]<\/p>\n

Personally, professionally and societally 2016 was, by all accounts, not a good year.<\/p>\n

You know I’m not normally one to shy away from difficult situations or complex challenges, yet a combination of things that felt like \u2018death by a thousand cuts\u2019 (including literally 1,000 stings thanks to a box jellyfish) created a vertigo-like ‘perfect storm’ for me, and I’ve taken a big step back to reassess what I want to spend time & energy on.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve been reading, learning, listening and discussing many things<\/a> with many people: from refugees to extremist murderers; from quantum computing to political communication; from mental health to war; from artificial intelligence to the nature of work; from disillusionment in the social impact of the web to climate change.<\/p>\n

And looking at the structures, roles and actors that exist today, and those required to affect positive change. Looking forward, the challenges that face us are increasing not diminishing.<\/p>\n

From a period of sustained belief, events around the world (including the elections in the UK, USA and beyond) seem to have eroded general feelings of hope in a way I’ve not experienced on such a scale before.<\/p>\n

And whether expressed as anger, bereavement, guilt, despair or action, my media feeds are filled with fear. Individual and group conversations contain sentiments of grappling how to combat the insidious forces of disenfranchisement (political or otherwise), financial pressures and related anxieties (from the price of property to the ability to remain in the UK); all are underpinned with a fragile sense of self-worth, and a low sense of agency in making any difference that will create meaningful impact.<\/p>\n

At the same time, the \u2018HR PR\u2019 in companies claiming they are changing the world has gone beyond saturation: everything is now a \u2018mission\u2019, \u2018platform\u2019, \u2018ecosystem\u2019, \u2018environment\u2019 and not just a \u2018thing\u2019.<\/p>\n

And it feels like we might be over \u2018tech<\/a>\u2019 (at last!), learning that unicorn-chasing is bad for the economy, and there are now so many incubators and accelerators I think we can just say that \u2018tech\u2019 is like other sectors: there are a lot of ambitious people running ambitious small-medium sized businesses. But it also feels like the \u2018long tail\u2019 is just \u2018zero hours contracts\u2019 at-scale.<\/p>\n

Together, perhaps we\u2019ve even reached beyond \u2018peak peak\u2019 and \u2018peak bubble\u2019?<\/p>\n

At the same time we have the most remarkable people, knowledge and tools to hand. A startling number of wonderful people I know have quit their jobs in the last 3-4\u00a0months and I\u2019ve been wondering what might be possible if we all gathered together to do things.<\/p>\n

We may have a set of perfect storms to tackle, but perhaps we also have a moment to capture?<\/p>\n

\"quote\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Action<\/strong><\/h2>\n

It seems like we have a choice to go high<\/a> or go home. It’s not entirely clear to me what ‘go home’ might look like, so it feels to me like we need to step up a gear in being the change.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is an extraordinary time full of vital, transformative movements that could not be foreseen. It\u2019s also a nightmarish time. Full engagement requires the ability to perceive both.\u201d<\/strong>
\nHope in the Dark<\/a>, Rebecca Solnit<\/p>\n

Our language is important<\/a> (it was Brexit, not Brit-in). I\u2019ve tried to distill many, many different ideas, ideologies, opinions, facts, to crystalise a starting point. One word that we could start to build from.<\/p>\n

That word is: dignity<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

From this word, I’d like to find ways of building respect and trust, plurality and structure, hope and empathy. I’d like to help us take the remarkable tools that we have to hand, that billions of people use and billions more will have, that capture the minds of a generation. And harness the fact that we have the most remarkable opposing forces at play right now: the ability for everyone to communicate at-scale and ‘for free’ the first time in history, paired with a fear-driven response that many simply do not want to listen or engage in that, or any, conversation.<\/p>\n

Today, I’m starting a conversation, with you, and those you choose to connect into this, to work out how we create positive impact at web-scale. It’s not a new idea, not at all. But it is a new time to begin, and we have new tools and skills around us. I don\u2019t think it\u2019s a new organisation, not a campaign, nor a movement (they all seem too old-world). \u2018Web-scale\u2019 can mean large as well as small: it\u2019s connectedness that counts.<\/p>\n

It feels like this is a collective. A collective based on actions-not-rhetoric, impact-as-delivery, for those hewn out of the digital generation, data-driven, decentralised: a d-generation. It needs to embrace organisations (large, small, commercial, non-profit), governments and individuals (whether inside or outside those structures). Fifteen years after I registered this domain<\/a>, I think I might be working out why.<\/p>\n

It feels like this is a time to pick a small number of issues, a target, a team, and a timeline for each one. To bind us to delivery, I\u2019m setting one year as the timeline for impact. The next questions (for you) are;<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Which impact target(s)?<\/li>\n
  2. Who\u2019s in?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    I’ve created drafts: a statement of intent, communications tactics, rules of engagement and structure that I’ll obviously make open when they are vaguely coherent.<\/p>\n

    I can’t promise to make a difference, but I can promise to spend my time and energy to create impact together.<\/p>\n

    Please reply if you can, and forward this to anyone you think might be interested in getting involved.<\/p>\n

    <\/a><\/p>\n

    [top<\/a>]<\/p>\n

    2. About that whole data thing <\/strong><\/h2>\n

    [6 min]<\/p>\n

    Our radically transparent, connected, globalised world is part of the problem. As with the early days of the web, we didn’t put enough energy into helping ourselves deal with its cultural, commercial, emotional and social impact.<\/p>\n

    After exactly four years building the ODI<\/a>, I left it in October. Its work is far from done \u2014 and there are great people there who will do great things. Equally, there are different winds blowing. We budgeted for an ‘open data winter’ but no one could have predicted the seismic shifts in the national and global political landscapes.<\/p>\n

    At the ODI, we invested a lot of energy and focus on cultural change (Data as Culture<\/a> created stories using data as a raw material<\/a>; Evidence<\/a> and Events<\/a> programmes made human stories using data). We invested more in communication than in R&D. In some ways propagating culture change was much harder than I expected; in others, it was exactly what I expected (especially with incumbent communities). It took three board meetings (and bear in mind who’s on its board) before it was explicitly reflected that “culture was always left to the end” in technology revolutions. And make no mistake, the web of data<\/strong> is a revolution: but it has very little to do with new technology breakthroughs.<\/p>\n

    The ODI was never a \u2018tech\u2019 company to me. I spent years helping people in organisations (from govt to business) understand that ‘tech’ is 10% of the change: it’s the impact that this 10% unlocks that is critical. Changing the way people think, changing business models, changing people\u2019s skills, and changing the processes that support individuals \u2013 while keeping focus on material impact\u00a0\u2013 are\u00a0the hard bits.<\/p>\n

    When confronted with an economically-driven, command-and-control mindset for which network thinking represents a genuine threat as well as an opportunity, trying to convince anyone “what’s in it for them” is especially hard.<\/p>\n

    Everyone loves ‘open’ as long as it’s everyone else that is being open,
    \nand they are the ones reaping the benefits.<\/strong><\/p>\n

    I have heard this (literally and tacitly) from hundreds of sources (govt, commercial, startups, NGOs) and it signals the size of the mountain we still have to climb to reach an open, networked data economy.<\/p>\n

    Nothing brought this home to me more clearly that helping to bring the Open Banking Standard<\/a> into existence. This completely ground-breaking and world-leading<\/a> initiative was understood as such by many<\/a> and yet, somehow, collectively its publication<\/em> was seen as an endpoint of innovation rather that the starting gun. We got the \u2018stick\u2019 part really right \u2013\u00a0it\u2019s now regulation<\/a>\u00a0\u2013\u00a0but missed a huge opportunity for innovation along the way.<\/p>\n

    On one level I reflect on that experience as the UK matching its stereotype of being inventors but not innovators: as if government had intervened immediately after Tim published his famous paper<\/a> to say \u201clet\u2019s wait until everyone is ready\u201d. We\u2019re now 12 months behind, and the rest of the world has noticed. This is not a new story.<\/p>\n

    We also need to figure out how an open approach: a fundamentally a democratic, free-market mechanic, can minimise the impact of demagogues and monopolies. It feels like the natural geek-response of more free, and more open is part<\/em> of the solution. It also feels to me like this isn’t nearly enough. We’ve won many battles, but it feels like no where near winning the war.<\/p>\n

    Networked Data \u21d2 Collective Action<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Big Data. Blockchains. IoT. WoT. AI. AR. VR … we fetishise technical language for commercial gain at our peril. I\u2019d like to know what we can do with new tech that we can\u2019t do already with the astonishing tools that we have now.<\/p>\n

    Descriptions that try to co-opt the web of data range from “linked data” to “blockchains” to “big data”. None of them speak to the fact that we need to think, as we did for the web (of documents), that “this is for everyone<\/a>\u201d, not another way of selling the same old models or same new snake oil. It feels like we\u2019ve sold past the close<\/a> on tech and need to rewind to the \u2018why\u2019.<\/p>\n

    We need to accept that data is not “the new oil”. It is not scarce. It does not reduce in impact the more it is used. It does not create catastrophic climate change (and yes we need the Cleanweb<\/a> as much as we ever did).<\/p>\n

    Data in a networked age increases in value the more it is connected<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Data that isn’t connected is valueless. We must start thinking instead of data as infrastructure<\/a>. Here’s a simple reference that I hope will help.<\/p>\n

      \n
    • Our physical infrastructure enables our physical economy<\/li>\n
    • Our digital infrastructure enables our digital economy<\/li>\n
    • Our data infrastructure enables our knowledge economy<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      I use the word economy<\/strong> deliberately. It doesn’t matter if you can list non-economic benefits, no one pays attention (at-scale) unless there is an economic impact. In addition, we need to finally, properly<\/em> embrace thinking of our economy as far more than \u2018financial\u2019. Our knowledge economy is where we can deliver triple-bottom-line thinking. It’s where we can make better longitudinal decisions. It\u2019s where open data destroys<\/a> [the need for] CSR. We also need to address the actual data economics of a global marketplace: define import, export, GDP (Gross D\u0336o\u0336m\u0336e\u0336s\u0336t\u0336i\u0336c\u0336Data Product)?<\/p>\n

      We are very, very far away from this. I’ve been to countless meetings where blind faith in technology-for-technology’s sake is still seen as some kind of unquestionable good. That because we have<\/em> the tech, that somehow the problem is solved and magic money will fall from the sky. This is deeply broken \u2014 anyone with any power to act to connect people to impact needs to do so; today.<\/p>\n

      My trend-watching often starts with how the web has impacted media (publishing, music, radio, TV). There are many useful lessons in those domains.<\/p>\n

      We need to think<\/a> about what the new 47%<\/a> of jobs might be in the same way that the lamplighters didn\u2019t foresee television. I met my first professional drone pilot<\/a> last year: he was a seven-year veteran, aged 15. Over the last 20-years I\u2019ve experienced countless examples of people expecting that old models of thinking will translate into the future. That it\u2019ll \u201cbe okay\u201d.<\/p>\n

      This isn’t the case. And it’s not just me, much smarter people<\/a> than me are saying these<\/a> things<\/a>.<\/p>\n

      Now is not the same as before. It’s not the same as pre-web. It’s also not the same as post-web. And, to quote EFF<\/a>, your threat model just changed<\/a>. I also believe we need to go much further than ‘just’ do no harm (even if Francis is spot on here<\/a> too).<\/p>\n

      We can learn from history that we had similar technocratic utopian visions for TV and Radio (btw\u2014TV came first). If you haven\u2019t seen it, go watch Dreams Rewired<\/a>: one of the most important and timely pieces of film I\u2019ve seen in a long time (email me if you want to come to a screening on Hans).<\/p>\n

      Action<\/strong><\/h2>\n

      1. Ask how you might communicate the impact of your work to me and to people that might be reading this<\/p>\n

      2. Send me that story the way you want to tell it, and I’ll include it in the next newsletter<\/p>\n

      3. Ask your colleagues how they might embrace network thinking<\/strong> in solving something<\/p>\n

      Definition \u2014 network thinking<\/strong><\/h2>\n

      Network thinking<\/strong> is what you did in the 1990\/2000s to solve a problem: you Googled the answer.
      \nNetwork thinking in 2017 is when you remember that humans exist too and ask them and collaborate.
      \nEspecially if they are outside of your company\/filter bubble\/comfort zone.<\/p>\n

      Network thinking in 2017 must reduce transactional friction (e.g. \u2018traditional commercial consortia\u2019 need to reboot. Contractual and IP-related issues need a hybrid of social-contract and legal framework embedded in a culture<\/em> of open innovation).<\/p>\n

      <\/a><\/p>\n

      [top<\/a>]<\/p>\n

      **** And now for something completely different ****\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

      3. Escape into the multiverse \u2013 an acoustic cosmology <\/strong><\/h2>\n

      [10 min]<\/p>\n

      Over the past 20 years, my stupid, grasping mind<\/a> has trying to find ways to combine music and cosmology. This began with writing music<\/a> that I (and others)\u00a0have struggled to describe verbally.<\/p>\n