Kevin Kelly: Next 5000 days of the web

Futurist Prediction: Kevin Kelly: The next 5000 days Kelly’s prediction and video focuses on the concept of the “single global machine”. The single global machine is Kelly’s expression of the World Wide Web as a single collective of human thought and ideas. The architecture Kelly’s personification of the single global machine consists of the operating system and the application. The operating system of the single global machine is the World Wide Web as a system of interconnected network of servers that is operating 24 hours per day, 365 days per year with no interruption. Collectively, the global machine amasses 100 billion clicks a day and consumes up to 5 percent of the world’s total global energy.

Technologically, this machine is arguably the most impressive of inventions linking page to page, machine to machine and data to data. The growth of the network of computers and the doubling of power every two years gives us the impression that there is no end in sight to both the possibilities and the number of people and devices that will be able to tap into the collective machine. In the next 5000 days, Kelly envisions the process of restructuring of the web as a convergence of new applications, data and devices. The convergences of the three mentioned components create new uses which contribute tremendously to the overall body of what we know as the World Wed Web. Psychologically, humans have the ability to expand the capabilities of the single global machine by getting better at “believing the impossible” to push the current boundaries of human thought to match the level of boundless computation that the web is capable of handling. Kevin Kelly’s video: http://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_kelly_on_the_next_5_000_days_of_the_web.html

Organ Growing Technology

Try our video maker at Animoto.

New Agora Method for Uses of Organ Growing Technologies

The Structured Dialogue Process (SDP) is a technique that seeks to provide solutions to questions through the use of a sequence of generating observations, clarifying observations, grouping observations and importance voting.  This process is accomplished through the use of facilitation techniques and collaboration software developed over the course of 35 years.  One of the final goals of this technique is the creation of an influence tree which is a visual representation of conclusions that have been reached and leverage points to show interrelationships and dependencies.  Throughout this process a roundtable discussion supplies responses to trigger question which are shared with the rest of the group.  This method has been known to be applied to many complex social, economic and cultural problems.  Specifically, SDP is very successful in cases when strong personalities and other barriers of effective group collaboration and dialogue have the potential to hinder the democratic process.  The SDP process can be used to seek out solutions to difficult ethical and societal issues – such as organ growing technology.

Despite the obvious concerns of abusing our own organs in the cases where another one can be readily available to replace them is hot spot for discussion.  In such cases, the trigger question may be – how do we prevent the abuse of organ growing technology but at the same time promote and encourage its best uses.  SDP can be more effective at discovering effective ways of using organ growing technology techniques to enhance the human condition.  The architecture of SDP calls for the development of a common language so that the problem can be better understood by the whole group so that each individual can ‘see’ the problem expressed through their own experience and understanding and not through someone else’s perspective.  A structured use of inquiry will be used to clarify and refine the question in context which will be marshaled through the use of root cause mapping software to aid the group to generate solutions.

 

New Agora Paper:
http://www.harnessingcollectivewisdom.com

How Can Grown Organs and its discussions be Tainted???

Medically, grown organs present an exciting and optimistic opportunity to replace diseased and/or malfunctioning organs.  In humanity’s best interest, lives can be both saved and preserved – the high demand for organs and the long lead times required to receive a donated organ would essentially be eliminated from medical facilities.  Support for the benefit of grown organs may be far reaching from an ethical perspective to help reduce some of the darkest and corrosive crimes in human history.  If the potential to grow organs can be realized instead of the procurement of donated organs, the global illegal organ trafficking market may disintegrate overnight.  According to traffickingproject.org, organ trafficking accounts for around 10 percent of the nearly 70,000 kidney transplants performed worldwide annually (traffickingproject.org, 2008).  On a more macular level, a rich recipient in need of a donor kidney organ would turn to the organ black market which harvests organs from poor donors.  National Geographic reported on a poor neighborhood in India known as "kidney village," where residents illegally sold their kidneys for about $800, which is by far less than the $160,000 price tag allegedly charged by a Brooklyn,NY organ middleman (Stier, 2009).  Illegal organ trafficking presents a moral issue for the entire global community where the heavy demand for healthy organs has materialized a new hidden market where the rich play -- and the poor pay a heavy price.  Yet the materialization of the discussion of the very sensitive topic of grown organs should be explored.   

Given the highly sensitive nature of the manufacturing of grown organs, there is a case to be made whether to approach a robust and thorough discussion of this subject using the Delphi method or the NGT method.  Fundamentally, both methods are used to reach a consensus regarding a subject however the two methods could not be any more divergent in both methodology and purpose.  One method works within hidden and potentially secret communication channels – questionnaires, surveys and emails whereas another method works within a more visible medium fostering open group communication and discussion.  There appears to be a divide and conquer methodology with the Delphi method that may potentially be used to slant an otherwise scholarly discussion toward an anonymous, yet biased and directed point of view depending on the nature of question construction and deconstruction.  In its best form, the Delphi method may be to discussion and learning to what “open source” is to software – a collection of the very best of breed solutions to a very direct and specific problem.    

Keywords:  Global, social, ethical, political, environmental, medical human rights abuse

http://www.acsh.org/healthissues/newsID.1818/healthissue_detail.asp

http://www.traffickingproject.org/2008/03/organ-trafficking-fast-expanding-black.html