1) The document discusses the universal human needs of authenticity and belongingness, and how technology now enables facilitating both simultaneously through conversation. 2) It argues that current piecemeal initiatives are distracting from what is needed, which is syncing global efforts to fulfill these basic needs and enable freedom for all people everyday. 3) The document imagines harnessing people's everyday curiosity through technology infrastructure that supports two-way conversations, in order to reshape society and revolutionize everyday life for everyone in a humane, non-coercive way.

2. [deck made after writing to belong rev]

3. on belonging
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belongingness):
This desire is so universal that the need to belong is found across all cultures and different types of people.
huge.. i think if we’re going to have any kind of a change for good.. it needs to be based in something universal.. something
already in us
however.. i think belonging is only part of it. in Peter‘s community – the structure of belonging.. he says our focus on
individual transformation has been proved not to work.. and i agree.. but i don’t think the two are binary.. i think they
(authenticity and attachment/belonging) not only go hand and hand.. but neither works w/o the other..

4. so i’d suggest.. (via Gabor Maté insight) that our 2 universally basic needs are authenticity (true to self) and
attachment (belonging – known by someone).. and that we should focus on and facilitate both simultaneously

5. the reason this particular time in history is so important (for a revolution).. we currently have the means for tech
to allow us to listen to and facil both (attachment and authenticity) at once
a quiet revolution
1 quiet enough to hear every voice
and
2 sans violence/oppression/coercion/et-al

7. on revolution
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution):
a fundamental and relatively sudden change in political power and political organization.. abrupt change in a
social order
i think all our partial initiatives/efforts are keeping us from the sync we need for global freedom/equity .. i think we
keep getting distracted/disjointed by irrelevants (money/measuring/accountability/commitment/et-al) necessary to
maintain/incentivize the partial ness.
and if i’m wrong.. thankfully.. there are plenty of amazing people/initiatives/efforts going that route

8. more thinking on that here: thinking restate/update 7/18

9. so.. on getting to a true revolution – abrupt change in social order.. based on universal basic needs
we could couch it in safety.. if you like:
safety
gershenfeld something else law (Neil‘s response when asked by pentagon how tech could improve defense/safety):

10. so why hasn’t Neil (founder of fablab ness ..similar to Scott’s tinkermill) caused safety and/or a revolution..?
i think it’s because of his focus on the tech to make the stuff rather than the tech to listen first ..to what
matters to each (has to be all of us – everyday) person ie: whimsy/curiosity.. ie: tech as it could be
it/we won’t sustain (a revolution or whatever) if its energy doesn’t come from w/in (invited vs invented ness) each person..
everyday

11. imagining the means to get to that ‘something else safety’ that art (as Dan says – gift) is via:
daily curiosity
i’m thinking we could get to those ‘gifts’ Dan talks about and that ‘something else’ Neil talks about if we would focus
on cure ios city.. via 2 convers as infra
2 convos to
reshape
/do-over
/revolutionize
everyday life
for all of us

12. again ..huge that it starts from w/in each individual everyday.. and self-talk as data (convo #1)..
is how that could happen

13. i’m thinking accountability & commitment.. even participation & engagement.. grate against curiosity, against
gershenfeld something else law, against our w/in ness, and so against the energy we need most.. ie: the
energy of 7bn alive people

14. to get to ongoing/authentic curiosity begs:
freedom
[krishnamurti free will law and krishnamurti partial law and burke freedom law and bishop freedom law]
on talking to people about engaging (ie: neighborhood walks) of course they’re happy to be asked..of course they want to
be part and belong.. so good on you for asking.. for having those convos.. but we need to realize the hidden (good willed)
agenda in invited vs invented ness
and when people are already too busy .. that turns into perhaps an unethical situation.. 1 getting people’s hopes us for
something that doesn’t yet have a mech to facil it in a humane way (currently all efforts end up leaving people on hold.. ie: bureaucratic
hoops) and 2 setting them up for feeling guilt/shame when they find they can’t fit it into schedule.. (costello screen service law)

15. and again.. to any/all of us .. if we are thinking we need to be accountable & committed ..that
freedom is compromised.. what we need are spaces of permission where people have nothing to
prove.. otherwise.. we are like whales in sea world .. not ourselves.. (which is what most of us are today –
hence the need to be freed-up/re-shelled)

16. a leap
a reset .. a do-over
(a leap allows for more of a revolution – abrupt change in social order.. than i think what your belong rev might actually be –
perhaps a reform/increment)
why try to leap back/to an undisturbed ecosystem..?
perhaps getting to that total freedom begs:
meadows undisturbed law: in undisturbed ecosystems
..the average individual, species, or population, left to
its own devices, behaves in ways that serve and
stabilize the whole.. – Dana Meadows

17. if we could only get back to that synchronicity.. we could let go of all our invented and time/energy-sucking bureaucracies.
we need a revolution in reverse..ie: revolution of everyday life

18. leaping begs and/or creates:
sync
many incredible people, have been seeking many incredible solutions, to bettering: education; health; budget;
poverty; et al.. for many years.
what if we already have the solution(s), we just don’t have them in sync. [people, space/resources, tech]
What if we bet (why bet) on an experiment, that no one has yet tried.

19. syncing begs and/or creates:
energy
the energy of 7bn alive people.. which is again.. what we need most
aka: eudaimoniative surplus

20. ongoing energy comes from:
equity
if equity is everyone getting a go every day.. redefining public education becomes
revolution of everyday life.. aka: global equity

21. in short
imagining a nother way.. based on maté basic needs
which we are currently capable of via tech as it could be.. ie: 2 convers.. as infra
[aka: not partial.. for (blank)’s sake…]
because what we need most is the energy of 7bn alive people in order to get back/to an undisturbed ecosystem
in the city.. as the day.. via gershenfeld something else law
[from a nother way book]:

22. the short equation

23. re iterating the coming together of tech (perhaps scott) and humanity (perhaps dan/mike):
for tech piece
we now have means to listen to and facil the chaos of 7bn free people.. everyday
app/chip updates
ie: hlb via 2 convers that io dance.. as the day.. as it could be
for humane piece
mufleh humanity law: we have seen advances in every aspect of our lives except our humanity – Luma
Mufleh
rowson mechanical law
not partial.. for (blank)’s sake
a nother way

25. let’s.. talk/listen/communicate/connect/community..
parts/whole graphic

26. short: deep/simple/open

27. redefineschool.com/a-quiet-revolution/