An eBay seller is getting rid of ten pairs of Disney World Animal
Kingdom "pirate style" trousers -- 32" waists. I don't rightly
remember there being pirates at the Animal Kingdom, but they are swell
renfaire-esque pantaloons.
Link
News: MS, Hollywood: Mob rules pirate world03/15/2003 05:59 AM testifying that software and movie DVD counterfeiting is an acute
problem, .. Microsoft and Hollywood would lead you to believe!! .. MS,
Hollywood: Mob rules pirate world .. supports terrorism .. evils of
piracy .. funding
Walt Disney World podcast04/14/2005 12:48 PM Cory Doctorow:
Inside the Magic is a gossipy webcast about Disney World created by a
Disney trufan who lives around the corner from the park and provides
good insider dirt on the park and its undertakings. This week's most
interesting news tidbit: no more asbestos in the It's a Small World
ride!
Link
(Thanks, Richard!
)
Battening down Disney World for Charley
Battening down Disney World for Charley08/22/2004 07:30 AM Cory Doctorow:
Caines sez, "A guest at Walt Disney World on 8/13 and 8/14 snapped
these shots of the MAgic Kingdom being prepared for Hurricane Charley.
Signs being secured and kiosks being tethered. He was staying at the
All-Star Sports Resort and his pics of some of the characters that
were sent, guests swimming, and shots of the rain/wind from his hotel
window. The last of the shots are trees and signs blown away."
Link
(Thanks, Caines!)
Tomorrow morning I'm catching a plane and taking my family to
Disney World. My laptop is coming with me, but I suspect it won't be
used all that much :)
I'll be back on Saturday (Feb 26), and I'll catch up with email and
forum posts shortly
after I return.
See you next week!
PhotoshopWorld attendees get Disney World discount
PhotoshopWorld attendees get Disney World discount07/13/2004 12:17 PM The National Association of Photoshop Professionals (NAPP), a sponsor
of the upcoming PhotoshopWorld Conference & Expo, has arranged for
significant savings off the price of Walt Disney World theme park
tickets for conference attendees...
Unhappy Disney World visitors gallery
Unhappy Disney World visitors gallery04/13/2005 11:51 AM Cory Doctorow:
This Flickr set is a collection of black-and-white photos of unhappy
people at Disneyland Walt Disney World -- there's something
practically eerie about this.
Link
(via The Disney
Blog)
WiFi hotspots at Walt Disney World
WiFi hotspots at Walt Disney World08/09/2004 11:46 AM The number of WiFi hotspots in Disney World has mushroomed. I can't
wait for my next trip there!
Disney's BoardWalk Resort: Convention Center Hallways/Common Areas,
Resort Lobby, Main Swimming Pool Area, Concierge Lounges, Bellevue
Lounge
Disney's Contemporary Resort: Front desk sitting area, 14th Floor
Concierge - sitting area, Outer Rim Bar (near Concourse Steakhouse),
1st Floor Convention Center Lobby, 2nd Floor Convention Center Lobby,
Feature Pool.
Disney's Coronado Springs Resort: Main Hotel Lobby, Convention Center
Lobby area, Feature Pool, Francisco's Lounge.
Disney's Grand Floridian Resort & Spa: 1st Floor Lobby area
including Tea Room, Convention Center Lobby area, 4th Floor Concierge
area - sitting area.
Disney's Yacht & Beach Club Resorts: Main Lobby area (both
resorts), Concierge sitting area (both resorts), Convention Center
Lobby area, Stormalong Bay Pool.
If
you're a regular reader of this blog, you probably know that I'm
opposed to unregulated 'free' trade, very worried about the
extraterritoriality of the WTO, NAFTA, Davos and other corporatist
captives, strongly opposed to domestic corporations 'offshoring' jobs,
using influence with the Bush regime and other right-wing governments
to circumvent social and environmental laws and responsibilities, and
a
great believer in taking the pledge to buy local, and in community
self-sufficiency.
At the same time, I'm a strong supporter of the UN and other
multi-lateral NGOs, and I believe that we each have a responsibility
for the well-being of all the people and creatures of this world. Some
readers have said this view is inconsistent, and I wasn't quite sure
how to respond to such charges. Fortunately, Peter Singer, in his
recent book on global ethics, One World: The Ethics of
Globalization,
has come to my rescue. Singer sees no inconsistency between strong
local autonomy, community, and self-sufficient economies on the one
hand, and global responsibility on the other. The book is based on the
Dwight Terry lectures at Yale in 2000, but has been updated to
incorporate reflection on the events of 9/11 and the appalling Bush
social, environmental and economic record.
I'll have more to say next week about Bush's fraudulent and despicable
Earth Day media blitz, and the major media's shameless lack of
critical
evaluation of the utter nonsense that his propaganda machine has been
churning out this week on the environment -- newspeak of Orwellian
proportions. The first part of Singer's book deals with environmental
responsibility, and his prescription for increasing it -- immediate
ratification of Kyoto by the US and other holdout countries, and
introduction of an emissions trading mechanism to make the realization
of Kyoto feasible (subject to the need for some oversight on the
disposition of the proceeds of such trading when it involves
autocratic
governments).
The second part of the book deals with the global economy, and Singer
adroitly tears apart the Economist's (and other neocons') naive
assertion that economic globalization somehow benefits both rich and
poor countries. He then goes on to prescribe a substantial reform of
the WTO and the GATT, which could actually lead to more equitable
distribution of wealth and more efficient production of economic
goods,
while safeguarding human rights, labour and the environment.
Unfortunately, the multi-national corporations and corporatists who
hold sway in the WTO would never tolerate Singer's prescription, since
it would entirely divert the benefits of economic globalization from
their pockets to those of the world's poor.
The third part of the book deals with international law, and Singer
lashes out at Bush for his unconscionable refusal to ratify the
International Court of Justice, and for the UN's continued hesitancy
to
accept a duty (not a right) to intervene in situations of genocide and
other humanitarian crises, even within a single nation. Singer is
sanguine about the limitations and dangers of 'global government', but
supports strengthening the UN to enable it to act as a 'protector of
last resort', and including in its mandate the responsibility to
supervise elections in all
member nations.
The fourth and final part goes back to ethical principles and proposes
that countries must, in this world where national boundaries no longer
have any logistic meaning, set aside national interest and embrace,
once and for all, global interest, impartially. That does not mean
cultural homogenization, but imposes a responsibility for the
reduction
of inequality, both of economic resources and personal rights and
freedoms.
Always the pragmatist, Singer concludes by worrying out loud about how
the responsibility for a global ethic could be managed:
It
is widely believed that a world government would be, at best, an
unchecked bureaucratic behemoth that would make the bureaucracy of the
EU look lean and efficient. At worst, it would become a global
tyranny,
unchecked and unchallengeable. These thoughts have to be taken
seriously. How to prevent global bodies becoming either dangerous
tyrannies or self-aggrandizing bureaucracies, and instead make them
effective and responsive to the people whose lives they affect? It is
a
challenge that should not be beyond the best minds in the fields of
political science and public administration.
I'd like to believe that this was possible, because if it isn't, we're
in serious trouble. We cannot expect national governments to set aside
parochial interests, especially when this entails accepting a
responsibility that would, for the richer nations, inevitably lead to
a
drastic redistribution of wealth to poorer nations and hence a sudden
and sharp reduction in, at least, economic living standards (if not
necessarily well-being). But as John Ralston Saul has so eloquently
argued, larger organizations and institutions, whether public or
private, are almost always, and inherently, less efficient, less
agile,
more resistant to change, more hierarchic, and less transparent than
smaller organizations. So the challenge is to achieve the best of both
worlds, having organizations of global scope and authority and
responsibility, but broken up into sufficiently small, autonomous and
dynamic units that they are sensitive, resilient, responsible and
responsive to the people and communities they serve. We can only hope
that "the best minds in the fields of political science and public
administration", wherever they are, are up to the task.
TrouSerS 0.1.9 (Default branch)
TrouSerS 0.1.9 (Default branch)03/19/2005 03:22 AM
TrouSerS is a Trusted Computing Group Software
Stack (TCG TSS) implementation. TrouSerS complies
with the TCG Software Stack Specification Version
1.1.
Changes:
The biggest changes between 0.1.8 and 0.1.9 are the addition of access
controls to the TCSD (see the tcsd.conf file and man page for tcsd for
details) and the exporting of the crypto and blob loading routines for
use by apps. App writers can now include tss/trousers.h to get
trousers specific routines which will hopefully be helpful. All
trousers specific calls that have been exported are prefixed by
"Trspi_".
The New York Times > Fashion & Style > Fooey to the World: Festivus Is Come
Whoops! Beware of your trousers (Reuters)02/19/2004 08:48 AM Reuters - Clumsy Britons risk life and limb keeping up with the latest
trends such as wooden
flooring and micro-scooters -- providing they survive putting their
trousers on in the morning.
German flasher tripped by dropped trousers (Reuters)
German flasher tripped by dropped trousers (Reuters)03/06/2004 02:00 AM Reuters - German police say they have arrested a flasher in the
western university town of Bielefeld who stumbled over his
dropped trousers during an aborted attempt to flee.
Welsh local govt website caught with trousers down
Roy Disney resigns from Disney, slams Eisner12/02/2003 01:43 AM Roy Disney has resigned from the Disney Board of Directors, and has
sent a scathing email to Michael Eisner explaining, in exorciating
detail, exactly why he's leaving the company his uncle founded.
1. The failure to bring back ABC Prime Time from the ratings abyss
it
has been in for years and your inability to program successfully the
ABC
Family Channel. Both of these failures have had, and I believe will
continue
to have, significant adverse impact on shareholder value.
2. Your consistent micro-management of everyone around you with
the
resulting loss of morale throughout the Company.
3. The timidity of your investments in our theme park business. At
Disney's California Adventure, Paris and now in Hong Kong, you have
tried to
build parks "on the cheap" and they show it and the attendance figures
reflect it.
During
my ten years as a Chief Knowledge Officer, I spent a lot of time
trying
to figure out how people should use knowledge, and to some extent how
people learn, but it never occurred to me to develop an overarching
'theory of knowledge' until I decided to write a book called The Cost of Not Knowing. This
article summarizes that theory.
This is not a new epistemology. I am disinterested in academic
arguments that use language, a clumsy and artificial abstraction, to
try to justify theories that to me are needlessly complex,
counter-intuitive and of no practical use. For students of philosophy,
and I'm sure this will come as no surprise to my regular readers, my
theory is consistent with Maurice Merleau-Ponty's phenomenological
view
of epistemology. For those interested in the philosophical basis for
this theory, I would recommend David Abram's Spell of the Sensuous,
much of which is devoted to explaining Merleau-Ponty's philosophy. I'm
merely interested in its practical implications, in work and in
life.
My theory starts with learning. Learning is the process of direct and
indirect experience and observation, and knowledge is simply the
personal, collected, internalized result of learning. We learn in
different ways (fig.1): The best way is through active participation,
which engages all our senses in the learning experience. Next best is
observation, where we see or hear but where some of our senses are not
engaged. The least effective way is second-hand, through communication
of reports from someone else. When a squirrel learns, by personal
trial
and error, how to defeat a baffle on a bird feeder, this is powerful
knowledge, well retained and employed. When that squirrel instead
watches another squirrel show how to do it, the knowledge is less
valuable, less credible. The observing squirrel may not be able to
replicate the other squirrel's moves, and the method may not be the
best one for the observing squirrel, which may have a different
body-weight or dexterity than the demonstrating squirrel's. And if one
squirrel merely tells another, unfamiliar squirrel of the presence of
food in a bird-feeder 'over there' that can be accessed by navigating
around the baffle, that knowledge is even less valuable. The squirrel
listening may doubt whether the baffle was or even can be overcome --
perhaps this second-hand report is merely bragging or a ruse on the
part of the reporting squirrel.
In human activities, we now get almost all of our knowledge
second-hand, through books, newspapers, television and online, and its
relative lack of credibility causes us to develop and assign a trust
'rating' to different sources, based on how often, in our experience
and that of others we trust, that report has turned out to be accurate
or useful. A blogroll is one manifestation of that need to rate the
trust-worthiness of second-hand sources of knowledge. Schools,
unfortunately, now provide almost all learning second-hand, and it is
not surprising that 'field trips' are so loved by students -- an
experience to learn something first-hand. It is also not surprising
that the most effective and credible form of second-hand report is the
story, which conveys
knowledge in a way highly analogous to the way we might have
experienced it personally.
Why do we learn? The squirrel learns in order to survive -- by direct
participation at first in play and then, often by observing its
parents, in gathering food, building a nest etc. The squirrel draws as
well on instinctive
knowledge, which is coded in its DNA as an evolutionary advantage,
which 'teaches' it the knowledge of its ancestors, for example to
'freeze' when it senses a predator species, which is often more
effective than fleeing predators whose eyesight is attuned to motion,
more than shape. That instinctive knowledge also tells it at what
point, as the predator approaches, to flee, based on its ancestors'
cumulative learnings of that point at which the probability of evasion
through flight begins to exceed the probability of non-detection by
the
predator. Instinctive knowledge doesn't need to be learned, so it doesn't appear on
fig.1 above. We're born with it.
In natural systems, where the community, the physical area in which
animals spend their entire lives, is small and almost completely
'knowable', we learn only to survive and make a living, and because
nature has evolved us, as an adaptive mechanism, to find learning fun
(fig.2). In such closed systems, we can get almost all the knowledge
we
need from direct experience and observation, and from our instincts --
there is little need to rely on second-hand reports as a source of
learning. As that physical area that we need to know to survive
increases, we can no longer get by with direct experience and
observation, so we need to evolve languages to convey more and more
knowledge second-hand. Our society becomes inevitably more
interdependent, and in addition to survival there are now three more
reasons to learn:
To be a responsible
citizen
of that society we need to know as much as possible. Crows have fairly
sophisticated and interdependent social structures, with 'travellers'
that move back and forth between different crow communities, carrying
information about the location of food and predators with them, and
they have developed appropriately sophisticated languages to convey
that second-hand knowledge. In fact, they have developed 'body'
languages and sounds that communicate the location of food to other
species (notably wolves and indigenous humans) on which they depend
(since their claws are not strong enough to tear flesh and kill, they
locate food for other species that can, and then eat the leftovers).
To be an intelligent consumer
we need to know enough to evaluate our choices. In a society where you
don't just eat what you kill and live where your ancestors did, there
are often more choices than we can try out through direct personal
experience.
To understand
our purpose
we need to learn as much as possible about our physical world and the
history of life in it. We have an instinctive desire to understand how
and why things are, which serves an evolutionary purpose -- it helps
us
to survive. As we assimilate more and more knowledge we assemble
patterns and theories about how and why things are. These are belief
systems (fig. 3). When early man observed how nature automatically
corrected population and resource imbalances quickly and painlessly,
he
began to believe in a higher power. When more recently he invented
civilization, a 'man-made' way to live apart from nature, he developed
new, anthropocentric belief systems to justify and explain this new
'separate' purpose for living. Belief systems so powerful that they
allow us to tolerate, and even celebrate, incredible suffering, and to
ignore and disregard our intuitive knowledge, which is inconsistent
with these belief systems.
So where does all this get us? Of what practical import is this
theory?
My prospective book is about the cost of not knowing, and that is the
'so what' of this theory:
Because we did not
know
the degree to which extreme and sustained suffering and outrage
perverts the human mind, and the malleability of those minds, we
allowed the slaughter of nearly a million innocent civilians in Rwanda
in 1994, and of nearly 3000 in the US in 2001.
Because we did not know
the consequences of reliance on catastrophic agriculture, we allowed
millions to die in the Irish potato famine, eighty million more to die
of starvation in China during Mao's Great Leap Forward, and the
horrendous threats posed today by BSE (Mad Cow), the Asian bird flu,
and as-yet-unevolved diseases and pests that prey on massive
concentrated quantities of astonishingly homogenous, vulnerable human
foods.
Because we did not
know
that nature uses diseases to winnow overcrowding, and that these
diseases will always evolve faster than we can prevent or treat them,
we allowed half the people of Europe to die in the Plague, and more
than one billion to die of Smallpox, and despite 'clues' like AIDS of
what is to come, future diseases we do not yet know, we still have not
taken drastic steps to reduce human overcrowding on our
planet.
Because we did not
know
the impact of our wasteful and thoughtless burning of hydrocarbons and
forests on our planet's climate, we now face cataclysmic global
warming
and the paradoxical early triggering of the next ice age.
Not knowing led
directly
to the loss of biodiversity and much of the carrying capacity of our
Earth, the demise of Enron and its auditors, the Great Depression, the
dot com bust, the atrocities of Stalin, and the Great Extinctions that
regularly obliterate much of life on our planet. And because we still
don't know these things for
sure,
we allow ourselves to hesitate, to do nothing, to hope these problems
will magically go away, to allow the conditions that almost certainly
gave rise to these and other disasters to continue, to in fact
continue
to get worse.
I had dinner last evening with some of our neighbours, and we were
talking about some of these immense problems, and one of my
neighbours,
a student of history, said that no problem in history has ever been
solved until it got so bad for so many that there was a spontaneous
revolution. What would it
take,
he asked, before these problems -- overpopulation, famine, oppression,
violence, disease, resource scarcity, pollution, war, suffering,
cruelty, misery -- got bad enough that people would rise up and demand
immediate resolution?
I think the massive unrest and strife we see everywhere in the world
indicates that we have already passed that point. However, in order to
have a revolution there must be (a) consensus on the need for change,
(b) consensus on the change that is needed, and (c) a simple process
to
bring about that change. Historically, the solution has been political
-- to oust, violently if necessary, an identifiable oppressor, the
cause of the problem, and replace him (or them) with new leaders
committed to the consensus solution. And although billions have shown
that they see Bush's corporatist imperialism, and the oligopolists'
'free' trade and globalization, to be causes of some
of the major problems we face, once we get rid of these scourges, most
of the biggest problems will remain. These more intractable problems
have no identifiable enemy and, as yet, no consensus solution. They
are
systemic problems that
can only be changed by a radical change to our entire global economic
and political systems. And changes to these massive, entrenched and
leaderless systems have historically almost never come about by
political means, but rather by introduction of disruptive technology
innovations that undermine the existing system, as the agricultural
and
scientific and industrial revolutions did. It is tempting to believe
that scientists, not collective human energy and collaboration, are
the
only hope we have for saving us from ourselves, of rescuing us from
our
colossal ignorance.
What is the cost of not knowing when, even if we could communicate
enough knowledge to achieve global consensus on the need for change
and
the change that is needed, there is still
no simple process to bring about that change? If we were to magically
and suddenly be able to bring knowledge to bear that would persuade
the
vast majority of people on the planet that unless we quickly reduce
human population below one billion and reduce each human ecological
footprint to no more than one eighth of the current Western footprint,
would that be enough to precipitate a combination of voluntary
abstinence, intense social pressures, and (over the objections of the
very powerful elite) laws and taxes and sanctions, to ensure that
these
targets were met? We did
bring about the end of slavery this way, and the end of the Vietnam
War, and in much of the world women's suffrage. Is the intractability
of our greatest problems really the lack of a simple, known solution,
or is it rather the lack of consensus on the problem, and of its
severity and urgency and what needs to be done to find a solution? --
The cost of not knowing.
Until the reactionary cult of leadership took over business thinking a
few short years ago, there was a consensus that the best way to run a
business was to agree on and articulate the business' objectives, get
each employee to define their role in achieving those objectives,
remove the obstacles that prevented them from fulfilling those roles
effectively, and otherwise stay out of the way and trust the Wisdom of
Crowds to produce better results than the arrogance of a few. Could
the
same principle, applied to the world's most challenging and
threatening
problems, work in society as a whole? And if not, why not?
It is the examples of slavery and the 60s peace movement and women's
suffrage that have caused me, insufferable optimist that I am, to
think
that there is hope. The solution of reducing human population by 90%
and ecological footprint by 10% (in the third world) to 90% (in the
West) is daunting, but it's also a simple, clear, measurable
objective.
And if we have six billion people working on it, convinced that this
is
what must be done to save the
world, there's no reason why it shouldn't be achievable. Women choose
not to have babies if they know pregnancy would put their lives in
danger, why wouldn't they choose likewise if they knew it put their
world
in danger? Would knowledgeable people agree to participate in an
annual
lottery for the right to have a baby, and live with the results, as
they now compromise so many of their 'rights' for the greater good?
Would they agree to a 100% tax on all wealth beyond sustainable
consumption levels, to be distributed to the poor? Would they shut
down
permanently businesses that knowingly damage the environment? Would
they abandon urban sprawl and big centralized governments in favour of
self-managed, self-selected, self-sufficient communities if it could
be
shown that these are more socially and environmentally responsive, and
responsible, political units? Would they wrench power, by citizen and
consumer action, from unrepentant corporatists who refused to give up
their excessive wealth and influence?
It is hard to give up old paradigms. I know a lot of people that see
the salvation of the world in global government, to which all states
will cede authority. I see no reason to believe that bigger more
powerful governments, which largely got us into this mess, and which
are more removed from the people they supposedly represent, would do
anything but make the problems worse.
But as the Internet has shown, the real power in any system remains at
the ends: The front lines, the communities, where people learn by
direct experience what works and what does not, what makes sense and
what does not. It is as individuals and as members of small
communities
that we define ourselves and establish our belief systems and commit
ourselves to action and to change. As citizens and consumers and
members of communities, if we only
knew, we could accomplish what needs to be done.
It is time for a bloodless coup, the taking back of power and
authority
from central corporatist political and economic institutions and its
reinstatement in local communities and in individuals. To bring it
about, we need only accomplish these four daunting tasks:
We need to communicate to everyone on the planet, one
person at a time, that there is a better way to live: happier,
healthier, safer, more egalitarian, more harmonious, more responsible,
and sustainable for future generations. We need to tell everyone a new story of our planet's
destiny.
We need to achieve, by a great deal of open
conversation,
discussion, and sharing of knowledge, a huge consensus that there are
two root causes underlying all the problems we face today and
preventing us from achieving that better way to live: Overpopulation
and overconsumption, and to set and agree upon deadlines and targets
for solving these two problems. Just as in past we agreed that slavery
and imperialism and suppression of women were our global enemies,
we need to agree that overpopulation
and overconsumption are our global enemies, a
threat to everything we believe in and a threat to our future. With
the
right mix of empirical and intuitive knowledge, we can achieve this
agreement.
We need to organize six billion people to use their
collective wisdom to tell us
how to meet these deadlines and targets, and then free them to
work in their communities to make it happen.
We need to help
each other clear away obstacles to
success.
That means a lot of humanitarian and peacemaking assistance, helping
to
build new infrastructure that will work in the new community-based
world, redistributing resources from the rich to the poor, and
disarming those that will try to establish new wealth and power
hierarchies.
So maybe knowledge is power after all. About two centuries ago some
new
stories arose that were so compelling that they became the world's
dominant religions, the basis for everything the vast majority of
people on our planet believed, and still believe today. Those stories
spread person to person, by word of mouth, before the printing press
accelerated their influence. At that time the people of our planet
were
struggling with the new problems of civilization, like famine,
disease,
poverty, addiction and violence, and they were desperate for new
knowledge, a new story, something to give them faith, purpose and
direction. Today we face much greater problems on a much greater
scale,
but we also have powerful new resources for spreading knowledge, for
telling a new story. We also have a much better sense of what the root
causes of, and solutions to, our problems are, and knowledge
offers
the most potent, perhaps the only, means to achieve global consensus
and global mobilization to solve these problems.
The cost of not knowing is the end of our world. It's too great a cost
to pay, and the answer, if we use the power of knowledge, is within
our
collective reach.
People will listen
when
they're ready to listen and not before. Probably, once upon a
time,
you weren't ready
to listen to an idea than now seems to you obvious, even urgent. Let
people
come to it in their own time. Nagging or bullying will only alienate
them.
Don't preach. Don't waste time with people who want to argue. They'll
keep
you immobilized forever. Look for people who are already open to
something
new.
When presenting a new
idea, you don't have to have all the answers. It's better to say 'I
don't know' than to fake it. Make people formulate their own
questions.
Don't take on the responsibility of figuring out what their difficulty
is. We each internalize information differently. If you don't
understand
a question, keep insisting they explain it until it's clear. Nine
times
out
of ten they'll supply the answer themselves.
Above all, listen.
Your close attention is sometimes more important than your
articulateness in winning converts. And learning is always a good
thing.
When I've talked to people about the ideas I've presented in this
blog,
I get the sense that maybe 10% really understand and appreciate what
I'm saying. Perhaps another 40% are ready to listen and want to believe, but either my
inarticulateness or their internalization mechanism garbles the
message. After all, saving the world (or, as one recent commenter
'geo'
put it more accurately "changing how humans live so we as a species
can
continue to survive") is not easy or obvious, or we'd all be busy
doing
it. This reading list is for that 40%, in the hope that better writers
than I can convey more clearly and compellingly what we need to do and
why. The remaining 50%, I suspect, are not ready. Five years ago
someone gave me The Spell of the
Sensuous and I gave up after five pages -- I just wasn't
ready.
Here's the list -- 56 books and articles that forever changed my
worldview, and my purpose for living::
What Life was Really Like
Before
Civilization: Revisionist History
Full House, by
the
late Stephen
J. Gould.
The presence of man on Earth was a random occurrence, and after the
next Extinction Event life on the planet is likely to evolve
differently. We are not the Crown of Creation.
The Wealth of Man
by Peter
Jay. The life of pre-historic man was easy, idyllic, and very
pleasant. Hunt big slow game an hour a day, relax and enjoy the
rest.
The
Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race, (online) essay
by Jared
Diamond Why the adoption of agriculture was 'a catastrophe
from which
we have never recovered'.
Original Affluence,
by Marshall Sahlins.
If you wanted to defend a new society that featured rigid hierarchy,
agonizingly hard work, suffering, frequent starvation and slavery,
wouldn't you try to portray
the alternative life as 'short, nasty and brutish'?
Extinction,
by Michael
Boulter. Our planet's history is one of cycles punctuated by
massive extinctions and new beginnings. Our only choice is whether to
end this one sooner (a century) or later (several millennia).
The Axemaker's
Gift
by Jame
s
Burke
and Robert Ornstein. How innovativeness has been increasingly
corrupted
to concentrate and retain power, instead of making the world
better.
What's Going On
Under our Noses: The Real News
The Unconscious
Civilization, by John Ralston Saul.
How and why we've become helpless slaves of the political and economic
system we built.
Ockham's
Razor, by
Wade Rowland.
What's wrong with our modern values, and where to look for new
ones.
People
Before Profit, by Charles
Derber -- How rampant corporatism ravaged
the vast
majority of people worldwide in the 1800s, and is doing so
again.
State of the
World,
by WorldWatch
Institute, The 7 trends that most threaten eco-collapse:
population
growth, rising temperature, falling water tables, shrinking cropland
per person, collapsing fisheries, shrinking forests, and the
extinction
of plant and animal species.
World Scientists' Warning
(online), by the Union
of Concerned Scientists. "Human beings and the natural world are
on
a collision course. No more than one or a few decades remain
before the chance to avert the threats we now confront will be lost
and
the prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished. A great
change in our stewardship of the Earth and life on it is required if
vast human misery is to be avoided and our global home on this planet
is
not to be irretrievably mutilated."
Dream of the Earth
by Thomas Berry.
"We are in trouble just now because we do not have a good story.
We are in between stories. The old story, the account of how we
fit into it, is no longer effective. Yet we have not learned the
new story."
The Future
of Freedom, by Fareed
Zakaria Why we can't change another
country's culture from outside it.
The New
Rules of the World, by John
Pilger
An accurate, devastating
portrait of the world in 2003.
The
Demon in
the Freezer, by Richard
Preston. How vulnerable we all are to
individual acts of terror, chaos and sabotage.
Against the Grain,
by Richard
Manning. How grain monoculture evolved, and how it's ruining the
Earth.
Population
Projections,
by US
Census Bureau. They're no longer assuring us that US and Global
Population will level out at 300 million and 9 billion. Would you
believe 1 billion and 12 billion by the end of the century, and still
rising?
Global
Warming, by
NOAA.
An online synopsis of US scientists' consensus on the causes and
consequences of global warming.
This Overheating World -
Worried? Us? (online essay) by Bill McKibben. Article
in the UK journal Granta explaining the psychology, and
cynical political expediency, of denial.
Are Cities Changing
Local
and Global Climates?, (online) by NASA.
Studies of urban microclimates and how they contribute to local
climate change and instability.
Restoring Scientific Integrity
(online) by Union of
Concerned Scientists. The Bush regime's distortion of scientific
research to forward its
own political agenda.
Climate Collapse,
by David Stipp
(online article) from Fortune Magazine. The possibility and chilling
implications of
global warming producing sudden drastic climate shifts.
Conservative Myths
on
Global Warming (online) by Blogger
Carpe Datum. A brief but thorough explanation of the science
behind
global warming, and the reasoning behind scientists' connecting it to
human activity and worrying about the risks of resultant
instability
The Empire
Strikes Out,
by Kenny
Ausubel. Corporatism and acquisitiveness run amok are ruining our
world, but nature always bats last.
The Tragedy of the
Commons,
by Garry
Harding. The commons, that which belongs in common to all of us,
is
disappearing -- Why nobody really cares.
Elizabeth
Costello, by JM
Coetzee.
Why we tolerate a holocaust against our
fellow creatures on Earth.
The Machine in Our Heads,
by Glenn
Parton.
How the ecological crisis is rooted in a human psychological
crisis.
About Gaia: What
Nature is Really About
When Elephants
Weep,
by Jeff Masson. Compelling
scientific evidence that animals feel deep emotions.
Mind of the Raven,
by Bernd
Heinrich. Compelling scientific evidence that animals are
intelligent, complex, rational and communicative.
The Sacred
Balance
by David Suzuki. A
passionate explanation of James Lovelock'sGaia Hypothesis, the need to
redesign how we live, and the importance of spending more time in
nature.
The Hidden
Dimension,
by Edward
Hall. We need space and a natural environment to be healthy and
human. When we're deprived of them, we get mentally ill.
The Spell of the
Sensuous,
by David
Abram. How to reconnect with nature, and rediscover wonder.
Radical Analysis, Radical
Solutions (these are the most important readings, but you
probably won't 'buy' their arguments unless you've first read much of
the material above)
Ishmael, The Story of B, and Beyond Civilization by Daniel Quinn.
Also the IshCon
discussion forum. The first two of these three books
are fictionalized stories about human history from a different,
anti-civilization perspective, with penetrating, astounding analysis
and insight. Ishmael is more
popular but I prefer The Story of
B
which recapitulates the entire theses in a series of 'lectures'. The
two critical lectures are online here.
Beyond Civilization is about
what
we should do about all this.
A Language Older Than
Words, by Derrick
Jensen.
A profound and disturbing argument for why moderate answers to our
current predicament won't work.
The
World We
Want, by Mark
Kingwell.
Why we are best served by trusting our
instincts rather than what we are persuaded is moral or
rational.
Toolkit for Change: Knowledge We
Can Use
to Save the World
Freeman Dyson's
Brain
(online interview), in Wired Magazine.
The
twin keys to building a better world are (a) establishing viable
self-sufficient local communities to replace big centralized states
and
governments, and (b) selective more-with-less technologies like
solar/wind energy coops and biotech medicines.
The Developing Ideas
Interview (online) with economist Herman Daly.
An economic and tax program that favours communities and commons
instead of corporations, and a 'contract' to reduce our population and
ecological footprint.
The
Unconquerable World, by Jon
Schell.
Why non-violence and
consensus-building are the only viable way forward.
The Support
Economy, by Shoshana
Zuboff A model for a post-capitalist economy.
Unequal
Protection, by Thom
Hartmann. The case for denying 'personhood'
to corporations.
When
Corporations Rule
the World, by David
Korten.
The need to get corporations out of politics and create localized
economies that
empower communities within a system of global cooperation, overcoming
the
myths about economic growth and the sanctification of greed, and
focusing
instead on overconsumption, poverty, overpopulation, and reining in
untrammelled
corporate power.
Radical
Simplicity, by Jim
Merkel.
How to free yourself from
possessions and wage slavery without sacrifice.
The Tipping
Point, by Malcolm
Gladwell. What makes things change.
Ten Ways to Make a
Difference, by Peter
Singer.
A pragmatic recipe for change.
The Truth About
Stories,
by Thomas
King. The truth about stories is that that's all we are. Want a
new
society? Write a new story.
The Corporation,
by Joel
Bakan. An action plan for undermining corporatism.
Humans in the Wilderness,
by Glenn
Parton. How we might reintroduce humans, well-spaced-out, into a
primarily wilderness Earth.
At Home in
the Universe, by S
tuart
Kauffman. How self-organizing,
self-managing systems work.
EarthDance (entire
book online), by Elisabet
Sahtouris. Eleven steps to cultural metamorphosis (my summary is
here)
eGaia
(entire book
online), by Gary
Alexander. How to achieve of peace,
cooperation and sustainability (replacing war, competition and growth,
the fuels of our current culture) and a future state
vision with vignettes from
individuals' lives in a balanced and harmonious future
world.
Just
got back from the McMaster World Congress on Intellectual Capital and
Innovation, where I made two presentations. I'll have more to say
about
the Congress in a few days. In the meantime, I welcome any Congress
attendees that have found their way to How to Save the World. I'd like to direct them to:
The Table of Contents of Business Innovation,
Entrepreneurship & Knowledge Management posts near the top of the
left sidebar
The links to my McMaster papers on the Future of KM and the Next Economy,
in downloadable Word format, also found in the left sidebar (my
regular
blog readers will have already read versions of these in my daily
posts), and
The section entitled Business/KM Blogs under Blogs
&
Resources I Read, further down in the left sidebar, containing links
to
the weblogs of about 40 leading thinkers on Business, Social
Networking, Innovation and Knowledge Management. Happy reading and
congratulations on a great event.
HEEEE'S BACK: WHAT'S COMING UP ON HOW TO SAVE THE WORLD
Apologies for my unannounced silence since
last Saturday. The power supply on my Dell failed, draining the
battery
so I couldn't even back up my files to another computer. I just got it
back now. More on this spectacular failure next week. This week has
given me the chance to work on my novel, The
Only Life We Know, and my book Natural Enterprise, as well as a chance to catch
my breath and think about (a) what to blog about next, and (b) what to
do with myself once the three books are finished.
Here are some of the things I'm planning on blogging about in the next
few weeks. If there's anything else you'd like me to write about, let
me know.
The Consequences of Failure: What
Eco-Collapse Will Look Like (coming up later today)
Book
Review - The Wisdom of
Crowds
Why We Should Set Higher Standards for
Everything
How to Save the
World Reading List - Updated
and Annotated
Book Review - Bird by Bird
Self-Selecting Communities: How
We Might
Build Some
Are There Any Large Innovative Companies
Left?
How Can We Reconnect Children to Nature?
Natural Enterprise Chapter 7:
Organic
Financing
My Favourite Canadian Francophone Blogs /
Mes Blogs Canadiens-Francais Favoris
Critical Thinking: More
Than Just Adjusting
for Spin
The Story-Maker as Cultural Anthropologist
Lots of thought-provoking stuff, so stick around.
IMF REPORT SAYS US DEFICITS THREATEN WORLD ECONOMY
The N
YT reports:
"With its rising budget deficit and ballooning trade imbalance, the
United States is running up a foreign debt of such record-breaking
proportions that it threatens the financial stability of the global
economy, according to a report made public today by the International
Monetary Fund. In nearly 60 pages of carefully worded analysis, the
report sounded a loud alarm about the shaky fiscal foundation of the
United States, questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax
cuts and warning that large budget deficits posed significant risks
not
just for the United States but for the rest of the world."
Historically, this kind of fiscal mismanagement, and the commensurate
warnings from the IMF if ignored (and the Bush administration has
already said it will ignore them), trigger the following
consequences:
Collapse of the offending country's currency. This has
already begun, and the only reason it hasn't been more precipitous is
that so many countries are owed so much by the US, repayable in US
dollars, that these other countries will do everything they can to
mitigate the decline until they can be repaid.
Inability of
the offending country to borrow in domestic
currency. Lenders, burned or threatened by the currency collapse,
insist that future and replacement debt be denominated in a more
stable, reliable currency. The obvious choice would be the Euro. When
(not if) lenders insist on being repaid in Euros, they no longer have
any reason to prop up the US dollar, which will then fall to a level
commensurate with the near-bankrupt status of the US
economy.
Ballooning cost of borrowing for everyone. When a
country
tries to borrow more money than it can comfortably repay, the risk to
the lender soars, and the interest rate jumps quickly to double
digits.
This flows through the domestic economy, since banks and investors
aren't going to loan money to American companies and individuals at a
lower rate than they can get loaning money to the US government.
Mortgage and corporate and consumer loan interest rates therefore jump
to double digits too. Foreclosures and bankruptcies soar.
The domestic stock and bond markets crash. As bond
yields
soar to reflect higher cost of borrowing, bond prices fall to the
floor. The cost of borrowing to American companies soars, wiping out
margins. Profits disappear. Stock prices fall. And since P/E ratios
reflect the opportunity cost of lower-risk debt investments, stock
prices fall much faster than earnings. Layoffs soar. Savings and
pensions are wiped out.
Cutoff of credit by the IMF. The IMF under its
charter is
charged with regulating international borrowings to ensure stability
of
global financial markets. They did this to the UK during the Suez
Crisis -- basically telling the UK that they could not
borrow any more money abroad until the economic fundamentals improved
to the point repayment was reasonably assured. They've done it to many
African and Latin American countries since then, and few of the
countries affected have yet recovered.
With no ability to
borrow abroad and domestic lenders
tapped out, there is no alternative but to radically slash government
spending. There is no money available for even basic programs. Tax
cuts
are history, and steep tax increases are imposed to get the money to
pay back the crushing, now high-interest debt. Financing of foreign
wars is out of the question.
This is not an exaggeration. Ask anyone in a country that has faced
it.
And while no one in the world wants to see this happen in the US
(because it will have a domino effect, pushing the whole world into a
depression), the world cannot afford to allow any country to borrow
wildly beyond its means. Bush is playing brinkmanship here, rolling
the
dice and hoping that the economy will somehow recover and achieve
unprecedented and sustained record prosperity for at least a
generation
to repay his staggering debt, before global investors lose their nerve
and stop lending to the US, and the IMF is left with no alternative
but
to step in.
The Times reports: "Though the International Monetary Fund has
repeatedly criticized the United States on its budget and trade
deficits in the last few years, this report was unusually lengthy and
pointed...Fund officials warned that the long-term fiscal outlook was
far grimmer, predicting that underfinancing of Social Security and
Medicare would lead to shortages as high as $47 trillion over the next
several decades, or nearly 500 percent of the current gross domestic
product in the coming decades."
This is the first warning from the IMF. It will be ignored, as it was
in Argentina. The consequences, for all of us, will be devastating.
You
know who to thank.
THINKING LIKE NATURE: WILLIAM MCDONOUGH REDESIGNS THE WORLD
Virginia
reader Myke Myers kindly
brought to my attention the work of his fellow Virginian William
McDonough.
McDonough is an architect and designer who has garnered a lot of press
for his bold yet pragmatic view of design. In a recent interview with
New Scientist he says:
Consider this: all the ants on
the planet, taken together, have a biomass greater than that of
humans.
Ants have been incredibly industrious for millions of years, yet their
productiveness nourishes plants, animals and soil. Human industry has
been in full swing for little more than a century, yet it has brought
about a decline in almost every ecosystem on the planet. Nature
doesn't
have a design problem. People do...
The Earth's natural systems can probably support a few hundred million
of our species, but soon there could be 10 billion of us...
Eco-efficiency, where you try to reduce everything to zero, is not
much
fun. And nature itself is not that efficient. It's effective. Take a
cherry tree in the spring. It's not efficient - how many blossoms does
it need to regenerate? But it is effective: it makes cherries. We
celebrate the cherry tree not for its efficiency, but for its
effectiveness - and for its beauty. Its materials are in constant
flow,
and all those thousands of useless cherry blossoms look gorgeous. Then
they fall to the ground and become soil again, so there's no problem.
We can celebrate abundance where it is ecologically intelligent. From
my designer's perspective, I ask: why can't I design a building like a
tree? A building that makes oxygen, fixes nitrogen, sequesters carbon,
distils water, builds soil, accrues solar energy as fuel, makes
complex
sugars and food, creates microclimates, changes colours with the
seasons and self-replicates. This is using nature as a model and a
mentor, not an inconvenience. It's a delightful prospect.
When I'm working with business people I talk business. We talk about
how much money can be made or saved, because that gets their
attention.
We never try to convert someone who is calcified: we never try to
teach
mules to play the violin. It sounds terrible and the mules don't like
it.
McDonough maintains four websites: His firm's, his partnership's, his own, and his intelligent design
site. The sites are as effectively designed as his buildings -- easy
to
browse, productive, engaging, and advancing the cause (the media are
invited to select from ready-to-plagiarize materials that simplify
writing about McDonough or his businesses). He's won awards as a
visionary and environmentalist, and his firm's designs have won awards
for eco-efficiency. And he's written a book, Cradle to Cradle
(itself made of recyclable polypropylene, not paper), with colleague
Michael Braungart, that explains the vision that underlies all his
work. It is, simply: Learn from, and
imitate, nature -- nature knows how to design and build things right,
everything recycled, zero waste.
This is the kind of thinking we need -- assuming we can
somehow solve the fact that there are at least ten times as many
people
on the planet as it can healthily support, and that our culture, and
its political, legal and economic systems are utterly dependent on an
unsustainable concentration of wealth, abuse of power,
ever-accelerating growth in consumption of resources, and subjugation
of human will and dignity.
McDonough calls himself an optimist, and thinks we can turn everything
around by just redesigning our world. But I think sooner or later in
this century, whether we solve the population and culture problems
quickly and intelligently, or go crashing into the wall of
eco-catastrophe, we are going to need to radically redesign and
rebuild
our culture, our economy, and our social systems. We can only hope
that
with guidance from people like William McDonough -- and also listening
to nature and our own instincts -- we will design and build the next
human culture more responsibly and intelligently than we did the
current one. So that those of us lucky enough to live in that brave
new
world will know only balance, beauty, harmony, abundance and peace.
Just as our ancestors lived for three million years before we invented
civilization, and just as every other species on our world has always
done. Imagine.
I've
always been a game player -- cards, pool, board games, and outdoor
games and sports. For me, it's not about competition, or winning. It's
about playing. The attributes
of the best games are:
Simplicity -- I don't want to have a degree to learn the
rules, and I like games that children can play on an equal footing
with
adults.
Speed -- A game should keep moving, and have a natural
flow to it.
Strategy -- I like to think, and a good game should
provide some exercise for the mind.
Sociability -- A good game deepens relationships and
allows social discourse, and laughter, as it
proceeds.
Artistry -- Aesthetics, elegance, good design, all
add a dimension to a game.
Here's my list of favourite games, and why I like them. Five
years ago
I'd probably have come up with a very different list, and I have yet
to
discover the best game in the world:
Dealer's Choice Poker
-- Not that silly game they play in casinos where you only get two
cards every hand, but the social Friday Night neighbourhood game where
stakes are low, bluffing is key, and someone introduces a new
variation
every time you get together. Favourite variations: Pass the Trash
and Do
Ya.
Chase the Ace
-- An elegantly simple game that children as young as five can play,
and win, but which also enthrals the most demanding adults.
Connect / Rivers Roads & Rails /
Metro
-- These are the simplest tile-playing games, essentially extensions
of
dominoes. Easy to learn, elegant, and often producing a work of art in
the final tableau. Our kids and grandkids love these games, and even
many of our adult friends like them. I've been told I should try a
more
sophisticated tile-playing game called Carcassonne, and after looking
at these
lovely tiles I'm inclined to try it.
Beach Volleyball
-- The world's simplest ball game, one of the few where physical
strength, size and finesse are only a minor advantage. Fun for all
ages, relatively safe, and good exercise. I prefer the
6-players-per-side game.
Personal Preference
-- An innocuous commercial game that rewards you for knowing what your
partner's personal preferences are. A great game for couples getting
to
know each other couples, and a great conversation starter.
Acquire
-- One of the most popular and enduring commercial games, this one
about building and investing in hotel chains. Educational, elegant,
hard to master, and still easy to learn. Kids figure out the strategy
of this game maddeningly quickly.
Joker Rummy
-- The
Joker variant of Rummy requires collection of runs and sets totalling
at least 40 points before laying down. Until you have laid down, you
cannot pick up the previous player's discard, and a joker (which
carries a 100 point penalty if not laid down) cannot be used as part
of
the initial lay-down. For that reason, this two-deck Dutch variant is
sometimes called Aggravation Rummy. Still, it's a great, easy to learn
game. If anyone can find the rules online (maybe in Dutch?) please let
me know. Contract Rummy isn't a bad alternative.
Balderdash
-- The only word game on my list, simply because it's really a
bluffing
game, not a word game. Since I'm a serious cruciverbalist, no one in
my
local social circles will play word games with me. But any serious
bullshitter can win at Balderdash.
Nine-Ball
-- My favourite pool game. Also elegantly simple, it uses only the
first 9 numbered balls, which must be struck (but not necessarily
sunk)
in order. But the twist is that only the nine-ball counts -- and wins
the entire game. That means that defensive play can trump aggressive
play, and strategy can trump skill.
Curling
-- The token Canadian entry on the list. It's the consummate game of
strategy, and old geezers like me can beat young athletes. When I was
a
kid we used to play on outdoor rinks with 'jam-pails' -- one gallon
cans filled with cement with a coloured plastic handle on top. With
properly pebbled indoor ice and smooth stones you need the 'free guard
zone' rule to keep the game interesting.
So what are your favourite games (to play, not to watch)? What do you
think is the world's best
undiscovered or underrated game? And why is playing games so important
to people all over the world, even as adults, an essential social
activity?
Grok Description matches for Disney World "pirate style" trousers on eBay GrokA matches for Disney World "pirate style" trousers on eBay
Disney World "pirate style" trousers on eBay
The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: