New Year Challenge: Make a leak proof silo

14 Responses to “New Year Challenge: Make a leak proof silo”

1. The Godfather on January 3rd, 2009 9:04 am

   What is your point here?

   Personally I have made many silos over the last 10 years, some with as many as 20,000 members, what are you getting at?

   The Internet is all about niche, niche is easy.

2. Jo Jordan on January 3rd, 2009 9:11 am

   You are confusing being able to take action with being able to live in a closed system.

   And possibly not wanting to belong to any club that will have you?

3. The Godfather on January 3rd, 2009 6:12 pm

   Clubs I can handle, I’ve captained rugby teams, Jo.

   I’m not confused in the slightest.

4. Jo on January 4th, 2009 12:54 am

   No one is doubting your leadership or #So.ME skills.

   The quip is from Groucho Marx and further popularized by Woody Allen.

   I am deeply puzzled by the panic set off by like minded people getting together.

   If it were so easy to keep people in little boxes then people who are so-minded wouldn’t need pass laws, sjamboks and tanks. In the normal course of events, people get together, groups overlap, groups change, people move on.

   I also believe I can trust people with the freedom of association and that I can trust young people to learn the issues associated with congregation, to apply the lessons of history to the opportunities of new media, and to deal with the issues that arise, as they will. If no issues arise, if there is not even one ’supreme court’ case waiting to happen in the realm of social media, then why be in the business? Without such an impact of our sense of what is possible, why devote our lives to it?

5. The Godfather on January 4th, 2009 4:59 am

   Can you clarify a few things here, as I read this thread there are things that do not add up.

   “I am deeply puzzled by the panic set off by like minded people getting together.”

   Firstly, what are you puzzled about here, Jo, and what panic are you witnessing? Are you puzzled by China Town existing or Brick Lane? - nobody is panicked here, it is what humans do, they flock to like-minded ideologies, group dynamics, and it then continually builds.

   I think you are missing the point entirely. It is not a top down control thing, ideological amplification is a human trait we ALL suffer with once a majority is formed, nothing to do with top down management or control.

   Have you read Thomas Schelling? What are your thoughts DIRECTLY related to the fact that humans are prejudice? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Schelling

   What are your thoughts directly related to “models of segregation” ? - let’s start with that first.

   My argument is that online “groups” need moderating, (in real-life buildings, mortgages and laws prevent us from segregating entirely) - online that is not an issue.

   As a practitioner of social media I feel responsible to un-amplify rhetoric and factually incorrect text, and amplify truth.

   So.Me is wonderful, I am a fan.

6. Jo on January 4th, 2009 5:29 am

   Now to remind you of my biography! I am a southern African! I think I understand something about segregation, its sociology, history, politics and law.

   I’ve not read Schelling in the original, or not recently, so I will cite Wikipedia. His great work was done in the late 60’s : in a context when forced segregation was an issue in my part of the world. When forced integration was an issue in his. It was important work and I believe partly led to a Nobel prize.

   He is not the only sociologist, nor is his work the only work that is relevant.

   Look at his experiment. His model has one decision point. Allow people to be more complex making decisions on multiple critiera? There are whole disciplines modelling these types of systems and I suspect a lot more has been discovered in the last 40 years.

   Towards the end you suggested what you may really want discussed. Are either of these close?

   a) As internet users, we need to be aware that we could settle down with like-minded people and not hear other views on matters important to us.
   b) As community leaders we need to be aware that we could become homogenous quickly.
   c) There should be some laws to stop people become homogenous.

   If

7. The Godfather on January 4th, 2009 8:40 am

   “His model has one decision point. Allow people to be more complex making decisions on multiple critiera? ”

   Yes, of course he takes it to an extreme, and as I said, in the real world we have mortgages, jobs and other various mechanisms which prevent us flocking to areas of preference. - not so online.

   I do truly believe at base level we will flock to like-minded, like-cultures immediately or eventually, it’s somewhat intrinsic to human make-up.

   Further

   You mention if any of your suggestions are what we ought to strive for, and I agree with A and B though not necessarily C - unless the homogeneous group becomes dangerous to those involved i.e. crazy Texan religion suicide pacts, or, Israelis indiscriminately killing in the name of scriptures. - so yes, we do need laws.

8. Jo on January 4th, 2009 9:16 am

   I think the process that Schelling describes is central to the effectiveness of social media - as I have found to my benefit resettling in UK It’s allowed me to find appropriate niches and I have not been condemned to the long slow process of networking with people who don’t want to know me and have nothing in common with me.

   But it is not the whole story. That’s all. People are always experimenting around the edges and trying out new things.

   When we come to the other issues : helping peopled develop “organizational acumen”, I am intensely interested in the debate. For the most part, those of who develop organizational savvy do it by chance. Boy scouts, sea cadets etc. teach us early. We need to extend youth experience of leadership into the internet to make sure we have a critical mass of very savvy kids.

   I am interested in the development of authenticity (coherence). It will be harder and harder to live double lives. That’s good but also requires more thought from more people more of the time. The opposite of Shirky’s cognitive surplus. It’s demanding knowing what we stand for.

   I am very interested in the governmental aspects of internet too. Stopping people posing as consumers was interesting. Stronger rules on the internet. Radio 4 yesterday was chortling that Teddy Savelos (?) used to advertise all the wonderful things he had done in British towns he had never visited. No suggestion that was unethical.

   I don’t think the internet should weaken hard won civil rights though - the sanctity of parliament to take something topical. I think we have to drill down to the issues but as they apply to the community in the here and now. For me it is not a matter of applying the brakes but clarifying the agenda and helping people use the new tools to define themselves and learn how to influence and be influenced.

   And to learn as I go in what appears to be a cusp of history at many levels.

9. The Godfather on January 4th, 2009 9:40 am

   “I think the process that Schelling describes is central to the effectiveness of social media” - yes it is, it cannot function without it. As I said, it is merely accelerated online.

   And that is why the Social Media Mafia offers protection for companies, in order to monitor their brands and ensure that they have a fair chance at representing themselves, stating facts, and reducing idiotic fervour in So.Me spaces when something goes wrong.

   We can help protect you from prejudice.

10. Jereme Hancock on January 8th, 2009 8:25 pm

    Hi,
    I am the owner and creator of TheCatholicSearch.com, which has been around for a few years now. The way our site works is we only give search results from sites that have been submitted by our users and reviewed for Catholic content. The idea came to me during my RCIA classes. I received a list of sites to study and I decided that a “Catholic Search Engine” that only searched these sites would be useful. It kind of grew from there.

    I also should mention that the other site that you mentioned will probably get into trouble with Google. Originally TheCatholicSearch.com had a “googlish” logo and other “googlish” features. Google did not like it and shut us down for a bit until we sorted it out and changed our logo design.

    Thanks, Jereme

11. Jo Jordan on January 9th, 2009 6:06 am

    Hi Jereme

    Thanks for the comment. Sorry I didn’t come back to you earlier - didn’t get or see a notification.

    And thanks for the correction and elaboration too. Knuckles duly rapped for taking what TechCrunch said for granted.

    Would you have a piece explaining how the search engine works that you could adapt for us? And would you be willing to comment whether it throws up links that might be regarded as distasteful?

    Thanks Jo.

12. Jereme Hancock on January 9th, 2009 9:31 am

    Hi Jo,
    No worries. I am just glad my site, TheCatholicSearch.com, is getting more traffic since the release of CatholicGoogle.com.

    I am not sure if you have noticed, but CatholicGoogle.com has already been shut down by Google. Just try a search and you will see. They have also changed their logo/name to try to appease Google. I can tell you know that this just will not be enough. I used to run a site called ooglester.com. It Youtube API script site. Google banned adsense on the domain because it sounded too much like google. It now points to Clip-Motion.com which is the site for the updated Youtube API script.

    Now back to the point.

    The way I have TheCatholicSearch.com works is the only sites that are searched are the ones that I have reviewed. Also, the site uses Safe Search to keep users from searching for inappropriate items and getting similiar distasteful ads.

    It is not perfect. However, the site uses every means of preventing searches that would return inappropriate results.

    The purpose of the site is really for those who want to learn more about Catholicism by only searching Catholic sites.

    Thanks, Jereme

13. The Godfather on January 12th, 2009 5:33 am

    “The purpose of the site is really for those who want to learn more about Catholicism by only searching Catholic sites.”

    Is that really possible? - wouldn’t that be considered heavily biased, or do you include wider opinions?

14. Jereme Hancock on January 12th, 2009 1:51 pm

    @ The Godfather

    Well, I try to only include sites that do not go against Catholic doctrine.

Leave a Reply