Collective Intelligence Networks (CIN) are an entirely new way to share, trade and aggregate information. They embrace complex social networks, collaboration and market dynamics to achieve fundamental increases in human capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, aptitude and adaptation. CINs furnish a new capability infrastructure comprised of human relationships, diverse, far reaching information and markets, creating effective, fast-moving, and social information interchanges. This capability propels optimization and mastery of complex information and knowledge ecologies.
Collective intelligence Networks are growing rapidly. These networks help companies, schools, governments, and individuals to acquire, to create and lead ever-growing bodies of knowledge. Through a ceaseless flurry of self-organizing value exchanges, wikis, blogs and information markets, these stunning network capabilities achieve mastery of collective intelligence with breathtaking speed, accuracy and continuity.
Collective intelligence networks continuously amass, codify, refine and advance knowledge. Open, value-based networks enable far better decision making about product launches, features, policies and myriad other critical questions facing organizations, businesses, the environment and civil society.
What do Google, WalMart, and MyBarackObama.com have in common, besides their extraordinary success? They are organizations that are infused with IT in such a way that it leads to a qualitative change in their entire business.
I get frustrated when I see people highlighting use of social media–blogging, wikis, twitter, customer feedback systems like Dell IdeaStorm or MyStarbucksIdea–as if they were exemplars of what has come to be called “Enterprise 2.0.”
As I said in my keynote at the Web 2.0 Expo NY (and in a followup radar post), WalMart is a better example of Enterprise 2.0 than any of these more trendy examples of user contribution systems. If Google’s key innovation with PageRank was to recognize that a link was a vote, which could be counted and measured to get better search results, so too, WalMart recognized early on that a purchase was a vote. Each company built real-time information systems to capture and respond to that vote. WalMart built a supply chain in which goods are automatically re-ordered as they go out the door, with algorithms based on rate of sale controlling the reorders. Google built a better search engine, in which pages that were “better linked” were given priority over the ones produced by pure keyword matches. They went on to build real-time systems to measure what John Battelle called the database of intentions, as expressed by people’s queries and subsequent clickstream data, as well as an ad auction system that prices ads in real-time based on the predicted likelihood of the ad being clicked on.
I came to see just how closely MyBarackObama.com emulated these ideas of the real-time enterprise in accounts of the Houdini project, a bold program in which poll watchers eliminated the names from voters who had actually made it to the polling station from the “get out the vote” call lists:
While the hot line was too overwhelmed to be of much use, the source said the program itself still proved a smashing success….the campaign was able to clean 1.6 million voters from the call lists they distributed to canvassers that afternoon, making those lists 25 percent shorter on average.
While the infrastructure for data reporting broke down under the pressure of the election, the general trend is clear here: competitive advantage comes from capturing data more quickly, and building systems to respond automatically to that data.
Consider MyBarackObama.com as a kind of vast machine, with humans as extensions of the programmatic brain: volunteers log in to get their get-out-the-vote call lists. They place their calls, then use the web to report back their results. Those results modify the call lists for the next volunteer. At the other end, the Houdini volunteers are taking note of who is actually coming out to vote, allowing the system to dispatch additional attention to hot spots, for example where there is an undervote compared to the campaign’s projections. Meanwhile, the pruned call lists make the volunteers more effective. Inside the machine, programmers are tuning the algorithms, while top campaign staffers are making key decisions to adjust the resource mix.
Now put these three examples, Google, WalMart, and MyBarackObama together, and ask yourself what they tell you about the future of business, military operations, or any large organization.
Sensing, processing, and responding (based on pre-built models of what matters, “the database of expectations,” so to speak) is arguably the hallmark of living things. We’re now starting to build computers that work the same way. And we’re building enterprises around this new kind of sense-and-respond computing infrastructure. In this sense, you can argue that Microsoft’s term “Live Software” is the best name yet for the kind of software-infused enterprise we’re building.
It’s essential to recognize that each of these systems is a hybrid human-machine system, in which human actions are part of the computational loop. Back in 1998, when I was trying to understand just how people were using Perl and other scripting languages on the web, I came to recognize that web applications, unlike desktop applications, still have the programmers inside them. Perl was called “the duct tape of the internet” precisely because it was used for programming that was only expected to last a short time; the programmers were still there, constantly tweaking the application. (I first began using the image of “the Mechanical Turk” in my talks about this aspect of web applications in 2003.)
What became clear in the ensuing decade is that humans are not just part of the programming, but also sensors and actuators for computers. Our aggregate behavior is measured, monitored, and becomes feedback that improves the overall intelligence of the system. That is why I’ve said that the defining characteristic of Web 2.0 applications is that they “harness collective intelligence.”
Aside: I seem to have lost the battle to define Web 2.0 as” the use of the network as platform to build systems that get better the more people use them. Perhaps its the lure of the obvious: companies and products that harness explicit user contribution are easier to recognize than those that pursue the more subtle and difficult task of harnessing implicit contribution. Or perhaps it’s the persistent gravitational tug of the idea that the heart of Web 2.0 is ad-supported business models; therefore, enterprise features that look like those of well-known companies featuring user contribution and ad-supported business models must by definition also be “2.0.” For me, the far more profound and powerful systems come from harnessing both explicit and implicit human contribution.
Again, consider MyBarackObama.com. It definitely harnessed explicit contribution, providing a platform for volunteers to organize and host local calling parties, to blog, or perform other campaign activities. But ultimately, Obama’s ground game–old fashioned precinct-level organizing, amped up to a new level by an army of distributed volunteers armed with mobile phones and coordinated via a web application–was the key to his victory. The “explicit” social media elements of MyBarackObama.com paled in impact compared to the development of a next generation electronic nervous system, in which volunteers were trained, deployed, and managed by a web application who used them, in John McMullen’s memorable phrase, as “souls in the great machine.”
Launch the next currency system for humanity: a distributed platform for millions of free currencies to flow through the Net and our cell phones.
In more depth
Money is an information system. It’s made to measure and balance flows in the real world. Money needs not to be scarce otherwise it turns the world into artificial scarcity, even when it’s abundant. Money should be in right supply to account flows so that every marketplaces in the world — companies, neighborhoods, towns, regions, global communities, etc — can grow their wealth (all levels of Maslow pyramid) without constraints.
Money is about to follow the same path the media did these past years. Millions of free currencies will soon circulate on the Net and through our cell phones. They will not be controlled by states or central banks, they will be issued by those millions of marketplaces willing to free themselves from conventional debt-based, interest-based money (85% to 95% circulating today). Everyone will issue and use these free currencies simply because most people and organizations are undermonetized.
Dotcoms (eBay, Google…) will likely be the first to understand that their real business model stands in this new paradigm rather than the old scarcity model in which they grew.
The Free Currencies Project consists in creating the open global interoperable infrastructure for these millions currencies to be easily issued and put in circulation, in a peer-to-peer way. It is aimed become the next planetary tool for accounting, transacting and hoarding wealth. It will belong to the commons, it’s open source. It will be easy to use via computers and cell phones, making it accessible to the most part of humanity. Like email it will work peer-to-peer via servers, domain names and accounts (MyName^LocalCurrency.usa.ny.albany ; MyName^EthicalMarket.world, etc) provided by community currency service providers (CCSP).
User interfaces will be sexy, user friendly and irresistible. Think ‘Skype’ as a inspiration for the simplicity of the user experience and the viral model.
What problem or issue does it address?
Most people, most marketplaces are undermonetized. Conventional money does not allow full market potential to be reached, marketplaces cannot fulfill their capacity to exchange and build wealth. Offer and demand are not met not because of a lack of wealth (competencies, time, resources, energy, people are there…) but only because of a lack of transactional tool.
Conventional money self-aggregates in the hands of the few (Pareto law of condensation – the more you have, the more you invest, the more you get) it leaves other economic areas empty. We call this phenomenon ‘undermonetization’, it creates artificial pauperization.
Consequences are:
* concentration of power (undemocratic)
* poverty, violence, harsh competition, predatory behaviors
* natural resources unnaturally drawn from undermonetized places to places of concentrated money
* secrecy (don’t share what has value, make it scarce)
* artificial rarefaction of what is not scarce (so it can have market value)
The Free Currencies solves this.
Who will benefit the most and how?
The entire humanity:
* human relationships: no more competition and predatory behaviors because of scarce money (let’s leave competition to what is really scarce), this shift most human contracts to higher consciousness
* the economy: optimized flows of wealth across the planet at local and global levels because of the right supply of money
* the planet: the incentive to hunt or hoard scarce money by producing useless products sold through illusionary marketing (90% of consumerist market) is deactivated. Less junk production & consumption, an incentive for people to focus on higher meaningful activities, i.e. useful products and services = less pollution and more sustainable projects
* dotcoms: they can now enter in the real open source economy, i.e. generate wealth that is not based on scarcity models
What are the initial steps required to get this idea off the ground?
The work is already quite advanced. Some key steps:
1. Beta testing on early marketplaces (Q4 2008 and 2009)
2. Achieve the coding
3. Achieve SMS transactions on mobile phones
4. Build the best GUI possible
5. Elaborate viral incentive marketing
6/ Optional: build strategic partnership with telecoms and major dotcoms (if they get it before it’s too late)
7. Market release
Objective is to reach millions of users in less than a year. Speed (implementation & market growth) will depend on funding in conventional cash. If no conventional cash we will do it no matter what.
Optimal outcome. How to measure it?
* Most humanity shifts to free currencies, people can easily use their cell phone to make transactions in any of these currencies
* Developing countries realize they don’t need conventional money ($ or €) to exist on the international scene.
* A shift in consciousness occurs at planetary level. People realize that most problems (unsustanability, concentration of power and wealth…) existed as an unfoldment of conventional money.
* Banks lose their privilege to issue private credit money but understand the incredible benefit of providing services on these new markets.
* Major dotcoms and telecom players understand their core business relies in free currencies rather than the old model. eBay uses these currencies for its marketplace. Telecoms provide cell phones with built-in interface for free currency transactions. Google takes 1st mover advantage in and provides cutting-edge global currency services.
As a currency is a flow, it is easy to measure the wealth that was generated.
moolidoo can have interesting goals in working team.
You know, when you work in a team, like play in a football team, you have to tailored to the needs of the team. You do what wants the leader. This isn’t a real team: it’s a group of people that play following a guide.
In another case, maybe you, as other your companions, have big quality but everyone would show his personal quality and others play following the coach. This isn’t a real team: it’s a group of people that play for themselves.
What do you think to play in a team without a coach? You’re all coach of yourself.
Day by day, during a championship (a project work) the players thank and recognize attitudes each others. Everyone gets colour, and the team win.
This is a real team!
To define Humanity 2.0, we must first define humanity. Humanity is the combined group of people with the qualities that accompany the act of being humane. To be humane is characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals, especially for the suffering or distressed.
The first aspect of Humanity 2.0 has its base in Web 2.0 ideals. To understand this concept one must know that Web 1.0 is the one-way flow of information through websites which contain “read-only” material. The idea was to go to the Web to get information. Web 2.0, on the other hand, is the decentralization of the production of the content on the Web; it became “user-generated”. Different social medias such as myspace, twitter, and blogs are products of Web 2.0 and are tools that are primarily used via the internet and mobile devices, and can now be used for inter-user discussions and presentations of important issues or be simply the backdrop for interpersonal recreation or networking. Now the idea is still to go to the Web to get information but has changed to include going to the Web to give information as well. It is the union of sharing and learning.
Concordantly, Humanity 2.0 is still the idea that one must be humane but is now changed to include the idea that one must act using the social media options made available by the Web 2.0 interconnectivity. Humanity 2.0 is collaborating that which is already useful in the already developed world with that which will become and is already becoming useful in the developing world.
The second aspect of Humanity 2.0 is crowdsourcing: the act of taking a task traditionally performed by a working person, and outsourcing it to an unidentified, generally large group of people in the form of an open call. Crowdsourcing is a synonym for “participatory collaboration”. Ideas without action are of little value. Changing ones thought patterns without changing how one behaves is not social reform. We need to use crowdsourcing to generate ideas and tasks via these social media options made available by Web 2.0.
“The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary belief for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe.”
– John F. Kennedy
Kennedy may not have foreseen Web 2.0, but he did foresee the idea of Humanity 2.0—communal cooperation for the change of society and for the destruction of world poverty, of child malnutrition, of the lack of proper education, and of many other social negatives.
It is not social reform if you only change the way you think; actions need to be present for reform to even exist. Many ideas have risen throughout the years that for some reason have simply not been enacted into society. Why is it that great ideas die out over time? The reason is because there were no actions. As a history major, it is my job to study socio-philosophies and ideas that have risen and fallen, risen and fallen. There is only one of three outcomes for the teleology of any idea:
• Category 1, it will change the ideas of the society;
• Category 2, it will change the actions of the society, but only insufficiently enough to be a tainted and corrupted percentage of the original idea, having been manipulated by greed and lust for power;
• Category 3, it will change the actions of the society in its pure form based on the intelligence, integrity, and influence of those the idea impacts.
Unfortunately the vast majority fall into Category 1 and we are forced to watch sadly as the idea falls out of the scope of the society to join the ranks of the illustrious—the innumerable ideas that over time have been known and understood but simply not been enacted. Some examples of this common phenomena are
• power that does not corrupt,
• honest leadership,
• and even world peace.
Ideas that we have all agreed to be beneficial for our society, but have never had the unity to put them into action in our society.
A much smaller percentage fall into Category 2 and make it into actions that unfortunately are made by corruptible, power-hungry, and greedy CEOs, politicians, and many other positions of social pull and power. Some examples of this are:
• communism,
• Christianity
• capitalism,
• and even freedom.
Ideas that, in theory, would be completely beneficial for all the members of the society, but are, upon the attempt of incorporation into society, sadly twisted through greed and the selfishness of people in positions of power.
A very miniscule amount of a very small percentage of ideas fall into Category 3 and arrive intact and whole on the side of action in a society. Some examples are:
• The Protestant Reformation,
• the Enlightenment,
• modernization
• and the Industrial Revolution,
Now although many of these ideas had faults in practice that were not directly inline with the perfect idea, the end result of the actions were close to the original intent. They make it into society and are incorporated for a time. The sad truth is that they so seldom stay for any meaningful length of time in comparison with how often those ideas of the corrupted Category 2 seem to guide our governments and civilizations. John F. Kennedy observes that “united there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided there is little we can do—for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.”
Although neither I nor JFK, I am sure, want to sound pessimistic, I cannot help but see the possibility that this failure to gain action symptom might happen to our idea. But there is only one solution to stopping the onslaught of unhealthily corrupted ideas, and that is to be a socio-unified family and coalesce together to maintain the proper leadership, proper distribution and delegation of power, and proper participation of the populace.
However our world is not in this mindset. We are fighting internally and tearing ourselves apart from the inside. The last time our country was fighting internally it was when slavery and continued misconduct of both the Northern and the Southern States drove our country from secession, and war shortly thereafter. After four years of unparalleled bloodshed up to that point, the reelection of a haggard and worried Abraham Lincoln signed the near-coming end of the war. What remained was a broken, scarred, and ununified Union. The solution was the Reconstruction. Whether radical or reserved, everyone in the country agreed that a reconstruction process was needed. Through their actions the end result of all the states entering back in the Union and their governments being rebuilt was achieved.
This time in our own personal histories right now may not be the same. We are not at war with ourselves… or are we? We are not slowly destroying our economy through greed, miscommunication, and hubris… or are we? We may not be walking up and down the streets with guns and killing the members of the opposing forces… or are we? We need to wake up and realize that although we may not be in a Second Civil War—an event that would be horrendous and frightening, but not surprising in the sense that it would be proclaimed—we are most certainly in a hidden war with ourselves, a hidden war against certain geographic locations, a hidden war against misplaced stereotypes. And what is more dangerous and self-damaging than the war that you do not even know that you are in?
There needs to be two things happening: the ending of this Hidden Civil war, and the beginning of the Second Reconstruction. Through changing our actions and unifying our minds and aspirations for Social Reform we can land the idea of a Second Reconstruction into Category 3—into actual incorporation in the physical world that we live. JFK once gave a similar call to action as he called for “a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.”
These ideas of Humanity 2.0 and the Second Reconstruction are only just words if we fail to act upon them—if they become carelessly lain aside to gather dust in the inevitable tick of time. But if they are acted upon then they become more than just words—they become change, they become restoration, they become freedom, they become revolution, they become the end of segregation, they become the rights of single mothers, they become woman’s suffrage, they become peace, they become equality, they become a Second Reconstruction. Through actions and unity, anything is possible. It is up to us to see that our words become the end of poverty, that they become the end of ethnic cleansing and holocausts worldwide, that they become the beginning of a return to intellectual, responsible, and integrity-filled leadership. May we unite to bring about the changes that our family of strangers requires of us: the generation of power.
“This epic before us is going to be written by the hungry Indian masses, the peasants without land, the exploited workers. It is going to be written by the progressive masses, the honest and brilliant intellectuals, who so greatly abound in our suffering (Latin American) lands.” – Che Guevara
Gain moos is simple.
First, you receive moos for your company thanksgiving if it’s our customer.
Second, and more important, from other “moolidooser” that feel to thank you
You want to gain moos?
Help a colleague on a project, solves his problem, twit an interesting article, improve the work of the team, give a ride to your friend.
Probably your colleague / friend / followers thank you, and if they want to give more importance to the thanksgiving, might thank you with some moos and recognize you some attitudes.
If you are an agile software developer, you know what is Scrum, his potentially and his functionality and you know how work in a team and speak about the team as I.
So, probably, you have problems about your personality and your profile.
You are part of a team, the team win, or lose.
Your talent and genius might not be appreciated.
moolidoo exceeds this problem.
You start a project with a team.
We give you the same number of moos for each developer.
You get colour and increase your reputation exchanging moos and recognizing quality and attitudes with thank and nudge.
At the end of the project, you can see the complete list of the qualities that recognize you the other “players” of the team and this permits you to emerge.
You have to be an employee of a company that is our customer or just know someone that has already joined the moolidoo community and sent him a nudge, using the panel that you find on homepage.
Complete the nudge panel choosing the “moolidooser” to nudge, a reason for it, and your email address.
Then you have to complete your personal profile, and start to get colour!
Play the video and follow the steps to register yourself:
.
The bigger goal of moolidoo is giving a reputation to his users based on the attitudes that they receive by their colleagues and friends day by day.
Obviously, a user when receive a thank can see the number of moos transfered and the reason of the gratification, but he can’t see which attitudes his colleague/friend has recognized him.
So, how a user can see his reputation?
The user, using his moos, can subscribe the “Personal Curriculum” service, for one, or more month. With this subscription he can see his curriculum with a cloud of the attitudes that he received from when he joins moolidoo.
“Personal Curriculum” will be update one time a month, with the payment of the monthly fee.
italiano