What's Really Driving Global Problems in the World Today?

We’ve explored many different problems on Your Undivided Attention - addiction, disinformation, polarization, climate change, and more. But what if many of these problems are actually symptoms of the same meta-problem, or meta-crisis? And what if a key leverage point for intervening in this meta-crisis is improving our collective capacity to problem-solve?
Our guest Daniel Schmachtenberger guides us through his vision for a new form of global coordination to help us address our global existential challenges. Daniel is a founding member of the Consilience Project, aimed at facilitating new forms of collective intelligence and governance to strengthen open societies. He's also a friend and mentor of Tristan Harris.
#YourUndividedAttention #TheCenterforHumaneTechnology #TheSocialDilemma #tristanharris #podcast #socialmedia #technology
*****
This is "Episode 36: [Unedited] A Problem Well-Stated Is Half-Solved" from Your Undivided Attention, the podcast from the Center for Humane Technology - a non-profit organization working to catalyze a humane future. View a transcript of this episode here: humanetech.com/podcast/36-une...
This insight-packed episode introduces key frames we look forward to using in future episodes. For this reason, we highly encourage you to listen to this unedited version along with the edited version: humanetech.com/podcast/a-prob...
The Center for Humane Technology also helped bring you The Social Dilemma, the Netflix documentary that chronicles the existential threats posed by social media. Help us turn the massive momentum of the film into lasting change: humanetech.com/the-social-dil...
Find other episodes and much more at: humanetech.com/podcast
Learn more about our work: humanetech.com
Tristan Harris TED talk: • How a handful of tech ...

[@consciously5745]

If you haven't already, I suggest going down the rabbit hole of Schmachtenberger podcast interviews. The more I watch the I am in awe.

[@TerryMaplePoco]

The one with Lex Fridman is my fave! They complement each other wonderfully.

[@MrJoker42369]

Agree. Ever since i heard his 'war on sensemaking' session he has been one of my favorite speakers ever.

[@consciously5745]

@@MrJoker42369 Same here

[@DavidDrimmel]

If Humanity wakes up to a common enemy we have in our midst, intervening races from beyond our world, it will be the only thing that will unify us enough to preserve our planet, our freedom, and self determination. Read the Allies of Humanity

[@bencubus1814]

Can confirm, watching/listening to Daniel over the last 3-4 years has been a very humbling and insightful experience. His modelling of presence and loving kindness while navigating such divisive, emotive and nuanced topics is awe-inspiring.

[@Carl1703]

Daniel articulates our current situation better than anyone I have ever heard.

[@jrgengrelllykken1083]

This should be seen by billions, not just thousands....Best and most understandable from Daniel so far.

[@DivadMick]

I could listen to Daniel all day. It's just a constant stream of new ideas and concepts I've never considered but they make so much sense after he explains them.

[@LuigiTrapanese]

Thank you for inviting Daniel. He is light-years ahead on those topics. And is a pleasure to hear.

[@lilyroa1960]

Listening to Daniel is like A tango! I hang on every word & feel Hope & hopelessness all at once! One of the few visionaries that resonants TRUTT, BALANCE , IQ & EQ! 🥰😥🙌

[@michelleingram1691]

How many people have had the privilege to listen to Daniel? Wow Wow Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Thank you for listening! Would love to hear what was most impactful for you.

[@lilyroa1960]

I live for the day we can hear A POTUS speak with this type of knowledge & understanding! People with this type of intuitive guidance & alignment are too smart for the job! O overqualified! Love Daniel!💝

[@wildflowerpower]

Politicians have to speak to "the people" in the language they can understand. If the people 'come up,' everything else will follow.

[@alaalfa8839]

Politicians today didn't study University or some of them so they can not speak academically... but I sometimes have a problem listening to this guy or some guys and hosts in these seminars. Tristan Harris and Cal Newport and Dr. Joe Dispenza and Dr. Bruce Lipton are smart but they speak in a way that everybody understands even ordinary people don't feel lost while listening to them...They don't speak as audiobooks. But this guy may talk in congress this way that lawmakers will understand but ordinary people will turn off the channel to something else. Perfectionists like this guy and Jordan Peterson speak this way.... Normal unperfect people speak like they are talking to a dog. But I wonder if his wife asks him what do you want for dinner and he replies this way... I think she would go to a restaurant. :) It's not for those who don't read so many books like him.

[@alaalfa8839]

There was some quote. being smart means that you have the knowledge to say things... being wise means whether you say it or not.. How many people are very smart to read a lot of books but speak in a way that everybody understands even those who don't read the books.

[@AlexBerezovskyJr]

The POTUSES and the people around them are just as smart as Daniel and Tristan, in some ways smarter. Difference is that Daniel and Tristan are well intentioned and honest. Imagagine if they weren't and used their brilliance and understanding of game theory and geopolitical zeitgeist against you. You'd be imagining our Gov't

[@z17seattle]

The problem is the most people that get into modern politics are power addicts that put their addiction before anything else. These same types make it to tops of corporate power structures as well.

[@KatrinaLoveSmart]

Daniel is truly brilliant!! I was blessed to meet him a decade ago, and am so deeply inspired by who he is, the intelligence and emotional intelligence he weaves together to share with all of us, and his trajectory of focus, which has always been dedicated to a world that works for everyone and all life systems. He’s got a heart of gold and a phenomenal mind - in service to love and compassion for all. I am hooked on his interviews… and deeply grateful for the gift he is in our world ☺️🙏🏼❤️

[@jesse3105]

I hope your voices continue to grow, the world needs to hear what you guys have to say.

[@Orpheuslament]

This is just awesome. This invigorates me to put more of my mental effort into solutions. It is impossible not to notice the problems but the reasonable solutions to these problems are not readily available and apparently take very intelligent people thinking deeply for a long time to get the ball rolling.

[@bradbear]

Daniel said everything about blockchain that I was thinking 5 years ago. This conversation needs to be seen by more people!

[@_broody2853]

i feel far from hopeless and very inspired hearing this conversation. Thanks so much for sharing this and for all the positive insights and talks you both do. Know that there are people interested and listening. 😎🙏🏼❤

[@behr121002]

People and podcasts like this, with Schmachtenberger, are so very valuable to education, awareness and knowledge of what's going on in the world. We need so much more discussions like this, at this level of awareness. And I'm total agreement with so many of the comments above and below this comment.

[@efortune357]

This is some of the best convo I've heard about diagnosing our problems and our potential solutions. I love that people let Daniel just talk. He's so articulate at describing how everything is connected. Bravo

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Thank you for listening! It was an insightful conversation.

[@efortune357]

@@CenterforHumaneTechnology Would love to hear a conversation with Scott Santens, a very likeminded and comprehensive thinker, and an expert on unconditional basic income.

[@SahakSahakian]

Tristan Harris! Kudos to your interviewing strategy. By just letting Daniel talk......amd freestyle. Thank you!

[@WarFilmStudios]

Couldn’t tell you how Daniel sleeps at night, but I’m glad he’s out there thinking about this for us.

[@wmgodfrey1770]

He talks about THIS very thing, i.e., being able to consider, carry, hold, etc. these ideas, facts, data, concepts and so on WHILE still being able to appreciate the beauty in the world, focus on the good stuff in life, be grateful for the great but simple things in humanity, and to be sane, stay Calm, go post Doom, and EVEN to do the activities in life that are most Sacred as well as to love what's most precious and important -- in his other talks and interviews. Especially in his discussion with Dr. Nate Hagens of The Great Simplification. I'm eager to see him in a dialectical dialogue (in to dia-logos) with Dr. John Vervaeke of Awakening from the Meaning Crisis-- BOTH of which BTW are on KZbin and in PodCast formats. All of which We humans need to take on board in order to help immensely in order for Us to move beyond the current Fourth Turning (Strauss and Howe), to be able to go forward with a proper To-do List, and for ALL - or MANY or ENOUGH of Us Hōmö Sapiens (Hōmö Callidus?) to do the Systems Thinking of making a better Human Society -- so that We can Self Organize (NOT Chaos), Self Correct (NOT Deceive), AND to formulate useful, grounded, healthful practices and RESPONSES (vs. quick, simple fixes CUZ there ain't no easy solutions.

[@jesse3105]

Daniel Shmacktinburger; the only public intellectual I need to listen to in slow motion to keep up with.

[@kokayiufanifu8309]

Love is Caring, Sharing & Cooperation for the Highest and Best Good of All! Love Is the Answer! A Global Paradigm Shift!

[@craigb4913]

Daniel has so many insights that you need to take notes and refer to them later if you want to take it all in.

[@antharian8053]

Tristan thank you for the amazing discussion. Daniel the only thing that is more intimidating than your holistic approach to knowledge is your surname.

[@aprilh9033]

I am so appreciative to have found this KZbin episode and will go back to watch others. All that I know is that Daniel S. and Tristan H. are " hitting the nail on the head. " Thank you for providing such extreme wisdom and thought provoking content. Truly, "meat for the mind."

[@Ln-cq8zu]

It's not a coincidence that you found the podcast and the podcast found you. I'm not suggesting any kind of woo woo. What's really happening is that people are seeking solutions, and the more people look the faster we are finding each other 👍✊🌅

[@tahwsisiht]

THIS! These are the people I respect and would do whatever it takes to support finding solutions ❣️ Real interconnectedness with real care. and all this come with intelligence to support it with action.

[@leedufour]

Thanks Daniel and Tristan!

[@RuleOmega]

Daniel you are truly my hero. I'm in admiration of you and I'm deeply inspired by you. Thank you and please keep going 💜

[@terryschiefer7050]

Tristan and Daniel, Both of you have voices that are founded in real experience. The discussion that the two of you are broadcasting is seminal to an understanding of what we as humans need to understand to secure a better future. I know that that your time is valuable but small things matter. it would be so helpful for those of us that want to lend our voices to create the dialectic that you propose if you would provide a chart, or written material that summarizes the salient points of you broadcast.

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Hi Terry, we actually do have an infographic for this! Check it out here: twitter.com/HumaneTech_/status/1415478584571990021?s=20. Please consider subscribing to our newsletter as that's where we share more resources like this. More at humanetech.com. Be well!

[@rawr4444]

Thanks for the wonderful discussion, guys! Listening to this in the new year of 2022. Let's make changes!

[@jjuniper274]

Fabulous discussion!!

[@phoenixj1985]

Absolutely bang on. This guy is super smart, he see's it exactly how it playing out.

[@jimmybolton8473]

Outstanding👌❤🙏

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Thank you so much 😀

[@markcarter9599]

You both are my new modern day hero’s. I can’t thank you enough for all your hard work. THANK YOU!!!!!!!!

[@ayln1988]

Amazing discussion. Thank you for the links, too. Beautiful site, page and transcript.

[@MichelleNayeliBouvier]

Incredible as always. Will likely relisten & take notes, even after rewinding numerous times to hear clearly.

[@TwoHighways]

This is the first time I’ve felt optimistic listening to Daniel regarding actual concrete solutions to some of the problems we face. I imagine he’s waiting for the consilience project to go live before doing JRE. Hope we figure things out before we revert to tribal kinetic warfare.

[@lynmcd8872]

I agree, Twohighways. I have watched many sessions with Daniel and there is a tape that he flips into to talk about our current dilemmas. In this conversation, he’s moved and is over some imaginable/conceptual hump with the C-project perhaps such that he is able to articulate the more positive directional possibilities. He is turning to the “what do we do.” The last few minutes are very interesting vis-à-vis the dissemination strategy of the project.

[@slicersharp]

Wonderful discussion I love it

[@danielmcardle3476]

Thank you for doing your best everyone.

[@forecast_hinderer]

Thank you both for this dialogue. Comment to help the algorithm.

[@pamelawanamaker6523]

Wonderful podcast , I’m hooked.

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Thank you for listening!

[@paulfuxjager829]

„Without good shared sensemaking there is no possibility for emergent order.“ That is the single sentence that matters IMO. The corollary is: We need to dedicate our efforts to establishing a consensus on the definition of "good" shared sensemaking. Consensus that "health = good" seems to be established. Multiple coherent definitions of "health" have been proposed, this one seems most useful to me: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salutogenesis Following from that, the single most critical cultural achievement is a consensus on this: 1) Human attention is the most valuable resource on the planet 2) Trading that most valuable resource outside of locally legitimated markets must be turned into a taboo.

[@HakWilliams]

The only way we're doing Schmacty's good ideas is if he is crowned emperor. 👑

[@craigwillms61]

In the first topic Daniel infers that the complexity of the various positions adds up to some sort of rhetorical gridlock as if it stops the progression dead in its tracks. When one side succeeds in casting their enemy as not only wrong but as evil itself, and with that they stake the moral high ground and proceed on, as if the other side has no right to breath the free air. It's not even a close to clash of equals. Clima-nistas win.

[@packardsonic]

We must solve the super structure of culture that is the generator function. We do that by improving culture by prosocialising: 1. Promote altruism 2. Organise it with Free Collaboration Networks. 3. Teach others to prosocialise. It is like watering our social garden. We have forgotten how crucial it is. It is easy, just do it!

[@BrianDeCosta]

If you like this, search Daniel's "War on Sensemaking" talks

[@EyalRonen11]

brilliant.

[@kokayiufanifu8309]

The weaknesses of Human Beings are the drivers of all our problems ego°selfishness, insecurities & fears!

[@isagenesi1326]

Really cool podcast

[@battfamily435]

Watching these two makes me realize even more just how to stupid, self-serving, and evil many American politicians are. And getting worse. I think 'dumb politician' is the greatest threat to human advancement. We need people like these two in our global governments. We need intelligent humans with a deep understanding of our e existential problems running the show.

[@treefrog3349]

The underlying assumption here is that the "better angels" of human nature will compel us to use the new technology towards a brighter, all-inclusive humanistic future. I believe that 5,000 years of human history argues eloquently to the contrary

[@jeanetjensen6474]

thank you :-)

[@danepaulstewart8464]

Devastating. I feel illuminated to the core ‘load-bearing beams’ that the foundation of global society is built from. I also feel stark optimism seeing that clearly more than a few people really do have workable long-term solutions. So why do I still come away with a feeling of devastation? I honestly don’t know. Maybe someone else has felt something similar and can speak about it. 👍

[@bobobonobo759]

Might be that we all talk ourselves away from the reality of these issues. Even when hand-wringing over this problem or another we use humor and cynicism to avoid taking in how bad the situation really is. When you state the problem - look right at it, it's pretty devastating.

[@katelambros2454]

It is the blessing and curse of the ethical tech professional that know the Truth of what these conversations bring to light. I’m also gaining optimism to use my knowledge and skill set to be part of a small, but exponentially growing group of highly skilled tech pros that can come out of the “woodwork,” find our “Tribe” and bringing us together so we can finally have an outlet for our visceral knowingness that we have the knowledge and skills to start building solutions - there is a tremendous opportunity for using the tracks built to suppress in our favor at a point of intersectionality a the ‘global community’ that We are. We are all in this together is phrase with a depth and density that is rarely truly acknowledged as witness to a fundamental Truth. I’m excited to start building solutions with all of You - thank you in advance for your camaraderie and support, looking forward to our paths crossing in the near-future!

[@JscottMays]

I didn't feel devastation, but despair. It lasted for a bit. Maybe, grief too The only way I moved forward was to find the internal conflicts tangled up in these issues. So, I feel you. Hang in.

[@debscamera2572]

Design Thinking is great for solving wicked problems that are way too complex to be able to clearly define. Mathematical proofs can be clearly defined. Most other stuff is fuzzier than that. It's love to hear Daniel talk about Design Thinking

[@DataJYdocs]

Good efforts! Note: best realigning humanity with technology rather than the opposite (realigning technology with humanity).

[@TerryMaplePoco]

great stuff

[@mszabol69]

1:17:01 How do we utilize the benefits of Tech for direct resource gathering by individuals and community/regional organizations outside of the model of shareholder ownership of profit. We have to ask this question and drive the inflection point pack to individuals and communities.

[@reubendocea9804]

I really enjoyed this podcast and listened to it about 3 times over, but struggled to find anything concrete to grasp on how to move forward with these ideas or what a sample plan for any aspect might be. The conversation is on a high level and is very interesting, but feels quite distant from describing more concrete solutions that would be an essential counterpart for what is being said. If there's something more detailed somewhere that I can read, especially about inter-governmental rivalry, that would be awesome.

[@paddykiernanmusic]

Yep. I value much of Daniel's meta-analysis, but it's not clear how to enact it. I think he is very averse to violent conflict and zero sum dynamics, but how you convince power structures to take on those values [when they have no short term incentive to do so] is hard to figure out.

[@RadekPilich]

1:05:15 Naive techno-optimism discussion

[@PatrickFerryCoach]

Incredible!!! So appreciative of you two and all involved ... and how the new tech can be leveraged instead of profit motives but for real quality of life incentives was very refreshing. The greed driven "solve 1 problem that a billion people have and charge 1$" and can I create a $100 app for it so that I can become the next billionaire so I can have my $40M dollar house ... That driver has been massive to most of our smartest and brightest unfortunately. The tech solution that could enable my 6 year old son to self discover his strengths and help me to enjoy the ride while he is inspired by his curiosity and going deep ... Verses the education system he is about to head into which bums me out. I hope the 2021 Manhattan Project geta underway fast vs this next $4 Trillion list of projects headed our way. I've already shared this podcast with a large group and I'll keep sharing it until their is better presentation. 🤓😍😎

[@mszabol69]

49:35 Daniel seems to be speaking from a Western historical perspective. I think it would be interesting to look at these technological shifts from some other cultural perspectives, as well. Like the Northern Indian. Or the Chinese. The relationship between cultural knowledge and intergenerational education isn't just a Western thing. And the idea and experience of a "Self" is largely culturally mediated, so Daniel's description of this evolution isn't universal by a long shot. It IS Western, which is perhaps the point. But the bigger issue we are facing is in how we can create networked humans in the age of the Tech Usurpation of Attention, which relates directly with the formation of a Cultural Self.

[@donnaschnare7029]

These two brains 🧠! Good lord 🤦‍♀️

[@bronze5420]

Fantastic talk! I'm curious how you see some of these new organizations/structures supplanting their existing counterparts given the resistance to change that you discuss. It seems that governments and companies have ever more authority, power, and influence over people, making the risk and difficulty of attempting to change or usurp these organization seemingly impossible.

[@paddykiernanmusic]

Good point. I think the "decentralised collective intelligence" that Daniel advocates is dead set against the ensconced power structures we currently have. And I think no matter how educated and enlightened the general population is, if their capacity for co-ordinated political action is systemically undermined by for example, the economic system, it's not clear how effective that education will be.

[@AdamMiceli]

Oh my lord this is pure brain food. Thank you for feeding me 🧠❤🙏🏻

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

You are so welcome!

[@OfZeitgeist]

The greatest minds currently alive on the planet need to come together to debate and agree on a New System of Societal Governance that can be deployed and adopted by citizens to evoke lasting change. Without it we will continue down the slippery slope of Establishment Authoritarianism where the majority are subjugated by the few.

[@markroest]

We can make Daniel's solution set a set of memes.

[@igieswainebragt]

as much as I enjoy what daniel has to say, he certainly freaks me the fuck out about our future

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

There are many challenges ahead -- which is why we need more wisdom to wield the powerful technology we have. Tristan speaks more about this in his recent talk here, which you may be interested in: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4PPmZuIm7d4l5I

[@mszabol69]

1:32:32 Daniel, we run into an entropy problem at this point. In order to lower the entropy to allow for these humanity wide ledgers we have to assume the large scale existence of higher entropy forms of industry, extraction, culture, and energy to be able to support these high cost ledgers. There is a material science limit you run into. If you cannot get these low entropy systems to be self replicating then you have to organize around the piece of the system that IS self replicating.

[@MarceloMichelsohn]

1:29:49 Daniel mentions Holochain. Please take a look at this project since it is completely different from blockchain and don’t have the entropy problem you’ve mentioned.

[@Demosophist]

The feudal overlords *did* subvert the printing press to continue their overlordship, and left behind most of the things that were *good* about the manuscript era (which is a better and more precise term than feudalism because it emphasizes the chief communication technology). I.e. what happened to the Hanseatic League?

[@bobobonobo759]

I'm more and more returning to my old naive internet utopianism- has the web not given us the tools to understand the problems it itself creates? A meta-tool for a meta-crisis.

[@vidamace6230]

You really don’t need technology, but the mind, expanding and repetitive, best accomplished when focused on one thing at a time

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Thank you for sharing that

[@teiuq]

whats your definition of technology?

[@JohnChampagne]

Economics texts say that charging fees to industries that emit pollution or deplete resources would make prices more honestly represent costs, and the policy would motivate efforts to reduce harmful impacts. We can carry the idea beyond where basic texts have taken it. We can charge fees in proportion to how much wildlife habitat is disturbed or destroyed. Sharing proceeds from environmental impact fees equally to all would end abject poverty. It would ensure that the policy does not make the least well-off worse off. We can end poverty and promote sustainability. (I write essays on the topic.) But we can only do this if MANY people SAY how to do it. If many people SAY how we can make prices honest and share natural wealth, we will see these ideas transform society. The ideas can be enforced in a decentralized way, if some fraction of the population is willing to block access to roads of any corporation that does not abide by these rules. If a few big players are unable to function, they will put pressure on governments to codify the rules, to ensure a level playing field for all. To create a world that is not threatened by a multitude of individual actors wielding great destructive power, we must make the rules fair. We must make our society fair and able to offer the promise of a bright future to youth. We must make a society that the people identify with and want to protect. Honest markets (that would align individual and societal interests) would promote sustainability. Sharing (a monetary representation of) natural wealth to all would end abject poverty.

[@kerrinnaude2777]

8:45 Preach - nth order thinking, creating processes for thinking, amid changing conditions and uncertainty - like a poker hand.

[@Gullinnova]

i have been preaching blockchain for gov spending for years now. Transparency is going to be core to an informed population.

[@webbedtoes2]

Perhaps the One & ONLY consideration I've never heard Daniel mention is that of a Game Theoretic play called: "LYING" and how this appears advantageous but will fast collapse. The question possibly becomes, how free will we be from the current Rivalrous tech advance? 🤝🏻🏆🤝🏻

[@mszabol69]

36:06 How do we get better interactions between free people. I think the focus on tech can be a red herring. If the people are educated on how to operate their attention then we can move the preference social transaction from the transistor to the Person. To networks of independent individuals and small businesses. An economy without shareholders. Just the people that do the work. If we can move the inflection point away from the transistor we give the humans some breathing room. The transistor only makes a difference when people are ignorant of their own "operating system".

[@qlee50]

Government corruption in Canada is not based on broken accounting, it’s based on justifying inflated contracts on non-deliverables to proxies and intermediaries that obfuscate the circuitous path of money back to those who award contracts.

[@life42theuniverse]

The source of our global problem is mindless pursuit of growth

[@tahwsisiht]

1:42:06

[@treefrog3349]

"A race to the bottom" encapsulates the current global dynamic. The universal implications of that phenomena are mind-numbing yet totally plausible. Is the human species merely a slightly more intelligent species of lemmings?

[@HakWilliams]

I'd say our unconscious knowledge of collapse is not sitting well in our psyches

[@olivergilpin]

Time stamps?

[@MarkusBohunovsky]

So much good stuff here, but: (1:30:00) I do not think that an incorruptible ledger will solve the problem of why government spends so much more than what the same thing may cost when done by private interests. My software company sometimes bid for government projects, and the very process that was intended to keep governments from wasting money actually resulted in having to bid about 3 to 5 times higher prices for the government projects than we would have for the same project for a private company. Why? Because in order to prove that we were the right company for the project, and to satisfy the government agents' need to protect their behinds, we would have to engage in a bidding and documentation process that literally ate up 3 to 5 times the time and resources that writing the actual software would. So, imagine there would be an incorruptible ledger recording everything: The contortions that government officials would go through to make sure they could not later be blamed for any mistakes, and the general effort to protect their behinds, would be so astronomical that absolutely nothing at all could get done. Yes: It may dissuade purposeful corruption, but it would clog the system up completely, by the fear of blame such a ledger would instill. The "incorruptible" part is also a very dehumanizing thing in general. It makes any form of forgiveness and flexibility impossible. (It would be an even more extreme version of what is happening right now, where the almost incorruptible memory of the internet confronts everyone with every little thing they may have done in their past, and makes it impossible for children and youth to make mistakes and learn from them in quite the same way as previous generations were allowed to.) So: maybe in very specific limited situations, such a ledger would be useful--but only if we thought through all the unintended consequences that it may have on the totality of the government spending process--or on the process of whatever it is used for. In other words, if incorruptible ledgers were used in more areas, our entire mindset as to what to do with all this historical information would have to change. As it stands, I feel that in many cases (legal, financial--think about debts, etc) the ability to "forget" is actually as much a feature of our system as it is a bug. Throwing this out completely, could result in a terribly harsh and unforgiving world that seems better suited to machines than humans.

[@OldEarthWisdom]

The singularity is near

[@kll.c]

i feel like not enough people are watching this.

[@janklaas6885]

8:15

[@userbeverage]

Nevemind the problems...I just wanna know what that tech thing behind David is?! 😅

[@lucasduncan1539]

#Bitcoin

[@markkennedy5479]

The claim made at the start of this interview, that correctly identifying problems is a crucial first step toward solving them--perhaps even half the battle--is true but incomplete. There's no guarantee that all problems so identified will in fact lend themselves to solutions, and the complexity of the problems detailed here may place them in the set of problems beyond our capacity to solve. In fact, this seems altogether likely. We have a sense, at least in principle, of where we need to go; in practice it may turn out we can't get there from here.

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Hi Mark, agreed that just identifying a problem fully is not a guarantee for finding a solution. Yet, we're entering an era where the complexity of issues are accelerating rapidly, and our ability to make sense of the complexity is lagging - resulting in a widening "gap" in our ability to respond. And then how will we come up with comprehensive solutions to complex problems if we can't make sense of them? Part of what we're pointing to is a need for greater sensemaking and wisdom. Curious what you think, and thank you for your response.

[@markkennedy5479]

@@CenterforHumaneTechnology Thanks for the unexpected reply (which you may come to regret). Please don't misunderstand... I applaud both your motives and the breadth of analysis. But if we managed to create the new social technologies envisioned in another video, what mechanism(s) would ensure that, a) noise wouldn't overpower signal; and, b) decision-making wouldn't be held hostage and ultimately paralyzed by obstructionist actors? I can't help thinking of the 'separate but equal governments' experiment tried between island groups in the South Pacific in the 1890s, known as the 'Condominium' to officials but called the 'Pandemonium' by everyone else. Short of coercion, subtle and disguised or overt and oppressive, how would the new channels of participatory decision-making shuffle wisdom rather than foolishness to the top more reliably than is the case now? Have you read Randall Collins' Sociology of Philosophies, which concerns itself with how ideas actually come to be, and with the impediments to their diffusion in societies, both institutionally and in individual craniums? A significant proportion of the problems the world faces emanate from within the supposed problem-solvers themselves, and they're various enough and idiosyncratic enough to make it unclear who the "we" seeking "comprehensive solutions" encompasses. Doubtless the pronoun designates some who are making rational attempts at sensemaking and doing their best to bring the interrelated strands of complexity into clearer focus; but it surely also includes people who know rationality only by hearsay and have simply been pushed around by whatever they've lived through. To a certain extent that's most of us: we're shaped by forces beyond our control, often beyond even our awareness of their existence. A "we" that construes humans to be highly motivated Enlightenment avatars, labouring on clearly defined group survival projects, is pure abstraction; and failing to acknowledge that hardly anybody conceives of their life in such terms imparts an air of unreality to discussions like these. I'm not trying to make a case for anti-intellectuals (though perhaps for the philosophy of pessimism), just pointing out what should be obvious: highly intelligent people, being people, have the defects of their virtues. They understand what they read, are adept at identifying issues and responding relevantly to questions, and assimilate data well and get a warm fuzzy feeling when they succeed in discerning (or fabricating) patterns in those data. They also have a healthy conceit of their own abilities, and why not?--those I.Q. test scores are flattering, and aren't those scores what count? What flummoxes them is how ideas they consider discredited decades ago keep coming back and playing decisive roles in public affairs. Oh my... how are lesser minds so easily deceived? Can't the cashier at Whalemart, for example, see that the "stone age God" contemptuously dismissed by Sam Harris is dead, along a host of other moribund notions? Well, no, surveys suggest that many Whalemart cashiers--along with truckers, postal clerks, dental hygienists, and even some physics professors--can't see that--and there are more cashiers than there are Husserl-level philosophers. Are those harbouring embarrassingly unsophisticated ideas just stupid? But 'stupid' is a relative term: the cashier and the physics professor are alike situated somewhere on the ignorance continuum, and there's often a surprising overlap in their basic assumptions and beliefs. In any event, the world isn't a philosophy colloquium, a playground for the super-intelligent. If you're a conscientious politician in a democracy shouldn't you be guided by the aspirations and understandings of 'dull normals' when framing policy? They may be dead wood when it comes to disentangling complexity, but aren't they the majority and entitled to live in an environment that reflects their concerns and conceptions of what's important, what's right? Should they really let Sam Harris do their thinking for them, substitute his judgments for theirs and resign themselves to passing their days in an alien world of his and other intellectuals' creation? I'd better stop here; this is already too lengthy. Despite appearances I do have at least a general sense of where I'm going--and scant prospect of doing more than hinting at it in a post. Videos like this one are as frustrating as they're entertaining: alongside the expectations raised they leave viewers (or at any rate this one) feeling there's a deeper conversation that's wanting the participants to have it, one that would grapple with the nature of explanation itself, and the limits of our ability to get supposedly objective knowledge into the (inevitably subjective) minds of individual knowers without relativizing it in some fatal way. We need more comprehensive input into decision-making, all right, but also better recognition of what qualifies as input and where in the broader sociological spectrum each contribution is coming from if we're to avoid dialogues of the deaf. And then we need to figure out how to get out of our own way, the leading narrative-spinners in particular. Thanks for reading.

[@mszabol69]

1:28:50 Is it? Is it really? Or is it a red herring? It's not just one "People". There are the Lords and the Peasants and they each have different roles to play in this resource gathering endeavor. Robots and AI still do not actually gather the resources and leave them at the doorstep of the Landlord. Robots and AI still only, merely, coordinate communications or perform a single repetitive function. And Robots and AI do not, and CAN NOT, supply all the resource needs of the Landlords. So even i the age of AI there is still a necessity for good, old fashioned, class warfare.

[@Ln-cq8zu]

Its an insult to think that most of us consumers don't know what the likes of Google and Facebook are up to! I know that I am being manipulated by algorithms, but a continuous scroll of funny cats is hardly being manipulated! I only use YT, and I am able to navigate my way through it. However most of my time is spent listening to podcasts like this. What's concerning is that the data probably shows that I am just a pleb, who has no control. That's the really worrying part the data says I'm a scrolling slave and happy to be in the race to the bottom which in my humble opinion is far from the truth then the whole system is bias and therefore wrong! However marketing don't want to hear that and I'm pretty sure having worked for corporate for 35 years, what's discussed in the board room is only what the CEO,s want to hear! 😢

[@iamLI3]

very true

[@OfZeitgeist]

13:30 there are many different solutions to the myriad problems that exist in the world. One of the major problems I see is that individuals can articulate the solutions but no state actors are instigating those solutions to effect positive change. Most seem to be exacerbating the problems with malicious intent.

[@greggardiner895]

Limbic Hijack brought me here....

[@newdawnrising8110]

Daniel is a great speaker with a wide vocabulary and broad understanding of industries. I like Daniel very much, but he has no real solutions. At the end of his talks I always ask myself “now what did he just say”. Most of his solutions seem very technical. Always a handful of institutions can improve meanwhile others will de- evolve. Humanities problems are a spiritual problem and a crisis of meaning. If individuals could “awaken” then any systems they are involved in would improve. Society needs to discover and operate based on a new “first principals”. It should be designed to serve in the self perfection of the individual and to service to mankind and nature through sustainability. Today’s culture is only about profits. That system clearly won’t work. Ppl need a new paradigm that can give ppl a since of meaning and purpose. This is what is missing.

[@CenterforHumaneTechnology]

Thank you for the thoughtful comment. For more on some new technology first principles, check out this post: www.humanetech.com/insights/the-wisdom-gap

[@donaldchristie8184]

THE COMMENTATOR DANIEL MADE A STATEMENT "CROPY JOB" I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A CROPY JOB WHEN IT COMES TO PRODUCTION BECAUSE AREAS , WHAT IS CROPY IS PAYMENT OFFERED TO THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE DOING THE JOB, BECAUSE ALL AREAS ARE IMPORTANT.

[@OfZeitgeist]

1:02:00 but if corporations didn't produce the micro plastics in the first place there would be no micro plastics to consume. It really irks me when the blame and responsibility is placed on the consumer. Make illegal the production of products that damage the environment. Simple.

[@macgp44]

Only 14,000 views in 6 months. Meanwhile Cardi B has 438,000,000 views for her latest masterpiece. I really want to be optimistic, but can't see the wisdom of guys like Daniel & Tristan winning out over the wanton ignorance of the majority.

[@driveagoodmanbad642]

“Self-terminating” = “we’re fucked!”.

[@teddygroven7537]

This discussion could just be placed on all kinds of platforms regardless of what they discuss.

[@elsiepfeiffer1395]

Shane so much is being censored at the moment.

[@Demosophist]

We don't need a "new concept." We need something, anything, that helps to realize Demosophia... which is a very ancient notion that probably predates the Greeks who invented the term.

[@Demosophist]

As John Warfield made clear, Demosophia is not a concept, and is especially not a "system" (even though John was a systems engineer). "Demosophia is a place!"

[@Demosophist]

I guess John's statement could be misinterpreted as geography. But without doing a lot of violence to what he meant, I believe we can think of it as a "nexus," and with that the term "nexus" actually starts to mean something, rather that merely being a kind of synonym for ambiguity. ;)

[@mszabol69]

45:43 Tech isn't really an ontology of it's own. The fact that "Tech" has destroyed sense making for so many people is intrinsically tied to the sociopathic imperative of "Shareholder Benefit". So Tech, as deployed against the American peasants, isn't, in itself, the agent of world view destruction, but rather, just the tool used for the purpose that the Shareholders established. Imagine if the owner of the sense making apparatus didn't have a Shareholder's profit in mind, but rather, an ideological narrative that could influence a multi generational geopolitical conflict. What might that look like? Perhaps it might segment and slice attention in a different way, into memetic phenomes, memetic syllables and the algorithm would string these phenomes together according to it's own designs? I wonder what that might look like?

[@kerrinnaude2777]

19:20 take the power away and covert to bitcoin