At OneZero, Ingrid Burrington interviewing Keller Easterling about her new book Medium Design. This quote seems to “place” the article and book pretty well; “her goal is less to galvanize readers behind her solutions and more to encourage a way of working and thinking that’s guided by creative reconfigurations and collaborations rather than delivering an imaginary TED Talk.” Touches on repair, not looking for the one solution, anticapitalism, ownership, and more. They mention mutualism a few times and you can consider the next piece, from an angle, as doing a “click and expand” on the concept.
I am trying to find a trapdoor out of that habit of mind — the search for the one and only argument, the one and only evil, the one and only enemy, or the Manichean struggle. […]
[T]his book is about another form of innovation that is not a quantifiable proof, a new technology, or a more precise measurement of doom. Instead, an innovation can be a relationship, a protocol, a way that things combine. […]
[K]ind of like a ruthless optimism—kind of an absence of naivete and more of a tactical optimism, understanding that something has to work, and it’s probably more worthwhile to believe that than to be the most correct about how it won’t work.
I’m already primed for liking this kind of piece but even accounting for that, it reads like a relatively plausible vision. The end goal is very far removed from our current planetary situation but a lot of the examples and strategies to get to that point are actually doable and quite a few are actually already being applied by various organizations and even countries. Very compressed; the idea is to take something that looks like a lot of the left-leaning policies already needed and promoted around the world, and rethink them to integrate nature and its preservation, while also taking it as a model and inspiration for humans to rejoin the natural world.”
This is the fundamental idea underlying an ecological civilization: using nature’s own design principles to reimagine the basis of our civilization.
Ecologies are themselves fractal, with the deep principles of self-organized behavior that perpetuate life shared by microscopic cells, organisms, species, ecosystems, and the entire living Earth. This form of organization is known as a holarchy, where each element—from cells on up—is a coherent entity in its own right, while also an integral component of something larger. […]
An ecological civilization, … would fairly reward entrepreneurial activity, but severely curtail the right of anyone to accumulate multiple billions of dollars in wealth, no matter what their accomplishments. […]
Manufacturing would be structured around circular material flows, and locally owned cooperatives would become the default organizational structure. Technological innovation would still be encouraged, but would be prized for its effectiveness in enhancing symbiosis between people and with living systems, rather than minting billionaires. […]
Governance would be transformed with local, regional, and global decisions made at the levels where their effects are felt most (known as subsidiarity). While much decision-making would devolve to lower levels, a stronger global governance would enforce rules on planetwide challenges such as the climate emergency and the sixth great extinction.
Danah Abdulla with an important reflection on the role of designers and how they approach the work they do. From the powerful and underestimated driver of convenience, to sometimes questioning some products but not often enough the question of consumption itself, to the fakeness of a lot of “doing good,” to being political, and finally on the importance of some pessimism (yes) instead of an oft blinding and obfuscating focus on positivism and hope.
“Hope is an emotion, a yearning, the experience of which is not entirely within our control. Optimism is a cognitive stance, a conscious expectation, which presumably anyone can develop through practice. […]
Problems are complex, but design educators want to make them simple. That is why design is all about the toolkit, and design thinking is condensed into a few steps. The complexity requires an engagement with different disciplinary, conceptual, theoretical, and methodological frameworks. […]
[T]ransformative means conjuring up seemingly impossible scenarios of what design could be collectively. To effect any societal change, design needs politics. A politicized designer is a collective designer, because designing is not an activity accomplished by one person. […]
Designers must move away from this positive, optimistic attitude that denies the place of any negativity, an attitude that denies realism. Optimism forces people to blame themselves for their own failures and misery; to never look at the structures of power that contribute to this.
Christopher Butler with his reading of the recent interview with Micheal Goldhaber (the “prophet you’ve never heard of” from No.160), and what I think can be a very useful expansion on the idea of attention; towards stewardship and this act of not only controlling our attention but participating in the existence or preservation of ideas outside of the attention of the mass. One does not only keep one’s attention, one also focuses on value that needs to exist.
Culture is a tapestry of ideas, beliefs, and agreements. And as powerful as any idea or belief or agreement may be, each relies upon attention. […]
The more we, as a culture, unify our attention, the bigger the void into which most things will disappear. Girard’s theory suggests that attention, like any product of desire, will ultimately fall into a pattern of mimesis. […]
[T]hese two ideas — the information economy and mimetic theory — intersect at the responsibility we each have to use our attention wisely. To care about what we consume so that we are the beneficiaries of attention no matter if we are giving or receiving it. To care less about receiving attention simply for attention’s sake. To consider our acts of attention as acts of stewardship not just over our own minds, but over the culture of which we are a part.
More → Drew Austin with Disconnection Notice.
Illich illustrates why the internet feels so loud and claustrophobic: The technology that mediates it ensures that every sliver of the sonic spectrum is allocated to someone, and when softer voices aren’t speaking, the loud ones simply travel further. […]
“Just as the commons of space are vulnerable, and can be destroyed by the motorization of traffic, so the commons of speech are vulnerable, and can easily be destroyed by the encroachment of modern means of communication.”
Two posts in the ongoing independent research lab discussion. Tom above with some ideas on backer-based financing, Peter after with public funding.
My quick notes: The lab idea is quite adjacent to the On projects, newsletters, products, and formats post I wrote. While they have a lot in common and there’s overlap, I see two different lines here: the lab thinking and creating products and services (Matt), and the one creating publications (me, Peter, Tom?). The former needs more financing which likely takes it out of the subscriber model Tom mentions. I love the “director as show runner” bit because it makes sense, and also aligns with bits of distributed work, the idea of squads mentioned before, and also aligns with the proven theatre/movie set/circus/building contractor models.
One unresolved tension here is how to mix individual backers with institutional backers. Andy covered his first year’s expenses via a grant from Emergent Ventures for example. This might be a strong argument for a more sophisticated platform than Substack to run the subscriptions through – ideally you’d like some nice way to combine individual backers and institutional backers. […]
This whole idea works because I think there’s a strong analogy between the research director of a research lab and a showrunner / worldbuilder. I’m no expert but I have a hunch that research labs only succeed with a strong willed, opinionated research director at the helm who can steer the vision, create worlds before they’re ready and secure funding.
I think there’s a real and important role to play for publicly funded, but largely independent research labs. These independent, publicly funded research labs could come with various focus areas (design, governance, public interest tech…), with different mission statements. They should probably be staunchly interdisciplinary. And they should share their research and results openly.
- 🇳🇱 🗺 😍 Netherlands building ages. “All 10 million or so buildings in the Netherlands. Building heights and date of construction from 3D BAG (Basisregistratie Adressen en Gebouwen) data.”
- The problem of CryptoArt. “Understanding and reducing our consumption(s) is the defining challenge of our time, and the tomorrow’s “habitability” of the planet depends on our actions today…. Today, the Crypto infrastructure relies mostly on fossil fuels (64% of the world’s electricity: coal 38%, oil and gas 26%).”
- 🐳 🤩 Beautiful interactive piece at The Guardian. Beneath the blue: dive into a dazzling ocean under threat – interactive. “Descend through the different zones of the ocean to discover its mesmerising marine life, how human pollutants are interfering – and what we can still do about it.”
- 💩 Short 🧵 by Rachel Tobac. Deepfakes will impact public trust, provide cover & plausible deniability for criminals/abusers caught on video or audio, and will be (and are) used to manipulate, humiliate, & hurt people. If you’re building manipulated/synthetic media detection technology, get it moving.
- 🇪🇸 🍊 ⚡️ ‘A role model’: how Seville is turning leftover oranges into electricity. “The initial scheme launched by Emasesa, the municipal water company, will use 35 tonnes of fruit to generate clean energy to run one of the city’s water purification plants. The oranges will go into an existing facility that already generates electricity from organic matter. As the oranges ferment, the methane captured will be used to drive the generator.”
- 🏙 🤖 ⤵ Why you’ll be hearing a lot less about ‘smart cities’. “People are more focused now on creating outcomes in their communities, whether that’s using technology, whether that’s reinventing processes – kind of the layering of all of those various approaches to making meaningful change on key indicators, whether it’s on health or equity or whatever it is.”
- 🎶 The Otherworldly Sounds of the Long String Instrument. “Its sound recalls Indian raga, with harmonies sliding over one another. Fullman says playing it ‘can be an ecstatic feeling, a floating sensation. Music is bigger than me: there are pitch relationships, shapes of notes beautiful beyond the level of human expression. I like that feeling of being a conduit. I don’t like egotistical thrashing. I like trying to give a gift.’”
- 😍 Gorgeous visualisation of every paper published at Nature.
Header image: Each sphere is a paper published in Nature.