►
From YouTube: Tech Talk: Open & Grassroots Communities by Nabil Naghdy
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Can
you
hear
me
yeah
hi
I'm,
back
I'm
I've
been
helping
out
for
the
last
couple
weeks
and
happy
to
be
on
board.
My
background
is
in
social
and
political
science,
as
well
as
philosophy
I've
worked
in
diplomacy
and
these
days
I
study,
big
ideas
at
Oxford,
things
like
ethics
and
how
norms
change
and
complex
systems
so
yeah
happy
to
be
helping
out
awesome.
A
So
he's
been
helping
a
lot
on
kind
of
framing
and
coming
up
with
a
space
and
will
continue
to
help
as
we
go
on.
So
let's
get
started
so
today,
we'll
kind
of
go
through
one.
What
is
grassroots
activism
and
why
is
it
important?
What
are
some
examples
of
it
and
then,
finally,
what
what
could
we
or
should
we
do
about
it?
A
So
hopefully
that's
a
Xterra
agenda
for
today,
so
we'll
get
started
on
one
rosters
activism
in
so
the
first
result
on
Google
basically
said
this
and
I
mean
you
can
read
it
yourself,
but
the
key
parts
are
one:
some,
a
group
of
people
being
passionate
about
a
cause
and
willing
to
actually
drive
a
change.
So
that's
what
grassroots
activism
means,
so
people
and
community
is
getting
together
with
a
certain
goal
in
mind.
A
So
how
is
it
specifically
structured?
So
you
normally
have
a
team
coordinators
facilitators
who
run
things
the
community,
ideally
rallies
behind
specific
principles
or
ideals
like
these
are
the
things
that
this
is
why
I
care.
This
is
why
it's
important,
and
generally
there
permissionless,
so
anyone
can
get
involved.
It's
not
like
it.
You're
allowed
to
be
part
of
this
movement
you're
not
and
it
it
can
be
leaderless,
so
some
have
leaders,
some
don't
and
finally,
there
should
be
a
clear
goal
like
what
are
you
trying
to
achieve
with
this
movement?
A
A
A
Is
it
coming
through?
Oh
there
we
go,
firstly,
participation
so
as
a
precursor
to
a
dowel,
which
is
where
statuses
that
I'm
going
to
it's
going,
having
an
active
and
engaged
community
is
important
and
then
that
community
can
participate
in
the
variety
of
ways
that
the
dowel
willing
include
people,
but
without
a
community
around
it.
The
Dow
is
pretty
much
just
a
group
of
people
that
we
have
now.
It
is
to
provide
support.
So
you
know,
as
most
people
know,
the
technology
the
status
is
building
is
I
would
say
politically
a
we're
eight
political.
A
So
you
know
the
technology
became
use
for
a
variety
of
ways
and
the
community
behind
that
isn't
important
to
essentially
support
during
challenging
times.
So
we
need
people
to
be
vocal,
saying
no.
Actually
status
is
a
good
thing,
not
a
bad
thing,
and
so
you
know,
support
for
the
technology
supports
are
the
things
that
status
is
trying
to
achieve
and
the
principles
behind
it
and
finally
escape.
So,
if
we're
trying
to
tell
the
story
about
why
status
is
important,
why
decentralization?
A
Why
Liberty
and
can't
just
be
the
core
contributors
on
the
Status
team
or
even
the
web
3
community,
which
relative
to
the
globe,
is
pretty
small
so
to
scale
the
message
and
to
scale?
Why
status,
why
decentralization?
You
need
to
have
millions
of
people
to
basically
amplify
that
message
and
get
it
out
there.
So
participation,
support
and
scale
are
the
primary
reasons
that,
from
my
perspective,
why
cross
race
activism
is
is
so
important,
so
that
that
covers
that
anything.
You
want
to
add,
after
that,
otherwise,
good
and
alright.
A
So
now,
let's
I
wanted
to
kind
of
go
through
some
case
studies
about
what
groceries
Ross
roots
activism
is
so
there's
this
book.
That's
come
out
about
five
months
ago,
four
months
ago
called
new
power.
It
looks
like
your
typical
business,
a
jargony
book,
but
some
of
the
so
Jeremy
hyneman's
who's.
The
author.
He
actually
runs
at
large
he's
run
a
bunch
of
large
social
activism
movements
around
the
world.
He's
responsible
for
the
largest
political
association
in
Australia
called
get
up
which
basically
encourages
people
to
get
out
and
vote.
A
So
he
has
a
track
record
doing
this
stuff
and
after
reading
the
book,
which
initially
I
was
a
little
bit
skeptical
about
the
principles
which
are
discussed
about
what
new
power
is
aligned
very
closely
with
what
I
believe
says.
So
you
can
see
on
the
kind
of
diagram
you
have
old
power
values
versus
new
power
levels,
so
types
of
governance,
being
open
source
transparency
having
a
builder
ethic
and
increasing
participation.
A
So
these
principles
on
the
right
are
pretty
actually
reflect
how
status,
what
some
look
like:
a
lot
of
census,
principles,
around
transparency,
being
open
source
being
kind
of
getting
people
to
actually
do
things
in
being
bold
and
and
the
way
in
which
Jeremy
is
kind
of
structured.
These,
like
organizations,
is
into
this
chart
now
I'll,
try
and
explain
it,
but
I
strongly
recommend
people
actually
read
the
book
in
order
to
kind
of
get
a
little
more
detailed,
but
essentially
delay
in
which
you
can
graph
these
these
values,
which
are
you
know,
old-school
versus
new-school.
A
Let's
call
it
you
can
plot
them
in
two
different
axes
on
the
on
the
y
axis.
You
have
how
the
companies
operate
and
the
x-axis
is
the
values
that
they
hold.
So
not
always
do
you
have
companies
whose
actual
structure
reflects
the
values
that
they
have.
So
the
examples
are
an
old-school
structure
with
old-school
values.
Are
you
know,
Britannica
or
Apple
or
NSA,
highly
structured,
they're,
very
hierarchical,
and
they
like
it?
That
way,
they
they've
structured
themselves
and
then,
like?
That's,
that's
how
you
like
it.
It's
closed,
it's
closed
source.
A
We
do
things
how
we
want
them.
When
we
have
no
interest
in
opening
ourselves
up
to
nuts,
you
then
have
organizations
that
are
structured
in
a
traditional
way,
but
actually
hold
a
lot
of
the
open
values.
So
some
examples
here
are
like
Patagonia,
which
are
very
progressive
companies
who
you
know
they
manufacture
clothes,
and
so
they
have
a
traditional.
You
know
high
ronke
and
they're
relatively
closed,
but
they
a
lot
of
the
values
that
they
hold
as
a
company
or
as
a
brand
are
in
this
new
power
in
the
opposite,
quadrant
you
have.
A
So
remember
the
examples
here:
let's
go
through
a
little
bit
of
detail,
so
we
have
Occupy
blacklivesmatter
Wikipedia
that
we'll
look
into
so,
let's
start
with
occupy,
which,
for
those
who
don't
know
you
know
they
had
this
big
cultured
by
Wall,
Street
and
I
was
occupy
other
things,
and
so
it
was
started
about
seven
years
ago
by
this
guy
called
makawide.
He
sent
an
email
out
saying
America
needs
its
own
attacker
ear
square,
which
is
where
the
Egyptian
revolution
took
place.
A
Come
join
us
on
this
website,
so
this
music,
this
email
was
sent
out
to
about
70,000
people.
From
this
who
are
like
this
anti-capitalist
group,
and
then
you
know,
everyone
in
the
community
is
like.
Oh,
this
looks
pretty
cool
I'm
going
to
create
my
own
website
that
does
this
I'm
going
to
create
my
own
website.
That
does
that,
and
so
they
started
to
kind
of
form
and
50
of
them
go
together
in
the
bull
near
Wall
Street
and
they
were
like
yeah.
A
You
know
99
percent,
we
are
the,
you
know,
bring
down
the
one
percent
and
it
just
started
snuggle.
So
these
people
were
out
there
for
about
a
month
two
months
and
then
it
started
growing.
One
of
the
one
of
the
challenges
that
occupy
had
was
that
they
didn't
actually
have
a
specific
goal
in
mind.
They
didn't
know
what
they
wanted
to
achieve.
So
when
you
ask
different
people
in
Occupy
groups
that
were
like
what
do
you
want?
A
It
is
about
30
or
40
bullet
points,
just
like
listing
all
the
things
that
they
like
that
meat
to
be
changed
right,
relatively
generic,
incredibly
broad,
and
then
you
had
this
movement
who
had
a
lot
of
people
come
in
joining
this
movement
and
then
essentially
every
the
reason
why
everyone
was
there
completely
became
diluted.
No
one
actually
knew
why
they
were
there.
They
were
just
focusing
and
then
after
months,
basically,
he
just
got
completely
diluted.
There
was
a
lot
of
infighting
and
it
just
kind
of
collapsed,
so
my
person
will
take
away
from
this.
A
Is
that
without
a
clear
goal,
movements
like
this
tend
to
fizzle
a
bit
a
bit
yeah.
So
next
is
Wikipedia
and
looking.
Peta
is
a
very
interesting
example
for
a
different
reason.
So
Wikipedia
started
off
kind
of
great
intentions:
we're
gonna
be
an
open
encyclopedia.
Everyone
knows
how
the
key
works,
and
originally
they
had
very
soft
hierarchy.
So
it
was
like
you
know.
We
have
a
small
group
of
maintainer
and
then
every
anyone
can
edit-
and
you
can,
you
know,
feel
free
to
own
it.
A
It's
all
yours
completely
free
to
do
whatever
you
want
and
then
in
2006
actually
created
this
process
very,
relatively
bureaucratic
process.
Where
moderators
who
come
in
and
say
this
is
spam,
or
this
is
incorrect
and
basically
started
to
create
a
lot
of
bureaucracy
around
the
editing
and
what
happened
was
after
they
implemented
that
there
was
a
big
decline
in
the
number
of
contributors
to
Wikipedia.
A
Next
we
have
black
lives
matter
which
is
kind
of
still
going
on
and
they
started
in
2013
after
the
murder,
from
a
policeman
to
a
black
man.
Trayvon
Martin
and
the
the
way
in
which
black
life
matters
has
been
structured
is
to
be
completely
leaderless.
So
if
you
look
at
like
in
recent
history,
a
lot
of
black
movements
with
similar
agendas
have
has
from
leaders
like
a
Malcolm
X,
dr.
A
King,
and
what
happened
is
is
that
quite
often
the
people
who
were
leading
these
groups
were
killed
or
persecuted
and
in
the
movement
would
fizzle
and
then
would
bubble
up
again
in
a
different
way.
So
the
way
black
lives
matter
has
strategically
positioned
themselves
is
to
say
their
honor
leaders.
Every
one
can
be
a
leader
of
black
lives
matter,
and
it's
it's
basically
like
a
so
there's,
no
way
to
kind
of
completely
change
it
or
kind
of
cut
off
the
head
of
the
movement,
and
they
have
a
very
clear
goal,
which
is
around
police
brutality.
A
So
my
personal
takeaway
from
this
is
you
know
legal
assault.
Relations
can
in
fact
be
powerful
and
can
make
a
difference
can
continue
to
exist.
Even
when
there
aren't
clear
like
this.
Is
the
person
running
running
the
show
if
there
are
any
questions
or
anything
just
feel
free
to
jump
in
and
I
hope
feel
free
to
chime
in
as
well
any
point
in
time?
A
The
the
last
example
I
want
to
talk
about
was
me
too,
and
that
started
in
2006
surprisingly,
and
it
was
about
it
started
on
MySpace,
which
is
just
absolutely
insane
to
think
about,
and
it
was
around
raising
awareness
for
rape
victims.
So
this
was
an
agenda
that
tirana
had
tried
to
push
and
try
to
gain
traction
for
a
really
long
time
and
people
didn't
speak
up.
And
finally,
a
journalist
broke
the
story
about
what
Harvey
Weinstein
and
then
this
whole
meet.
Who
thing
became
popular
became
Essene.
A
So
imagine,
11
years
you
like
pushing
his
agenda
and
then
finally
there's
a
tipping
point.
There's
one
thing
that
triggers
think
something
going
from
like
small-scale:
nobody
cares
to
it
being
a
world-changing
type
of
revolution.
So
that's
interesting
things
to
think
about
that,
like
this
movement,
which
is
now
relatively
normal,
actually
started
12
years
so.
A
That's
a
very
quick
overview
of
some
of
the
organizations
in
the
top
right
quadrant
of
this
meet
of
this
new
power
book
and
I'd
recommend
anyone
who's
interested
in
this
is
it's
relatively
humble,
only
came
out
a
few
months
ago
and
it
goes
into
detail
about
the
different
quadrants
and
how
companies
pretend
to
be
open,
but
really
aren't,
and
things
like
that.
You
can
really
dive
deep
and
one
other
interesting
element
about
what
what
Jeremy
looks
at
in
the
book
is:
what's
called
the
participation
scale
for
status.
A
A
You
have
consuming
sharing,
shaping
funding,
producing
and
Kony
and
what's
interesting
is
the
coding
part
is
surprisingly
easy
to
do
for
people
to
kind
of
have
a
an
interest
or
ownership
of
of
status
and
then
producing
content,
and
you
know
coming
up
with.
What's
your
version
of
what
status
is
so
there's
there's
various
ways
in
which
anyone
can
come
in
and
we
can
be
like
if
you're
a
designer
come
work
InDesign
if
you're
developer
come
working
development.
Do
you
know
some
language
contact
us
with
language?
There's
very
there's
like
a
really
large
number
of
ways.
A
A
Hopefully,
everyone
can
see
like
how
being
open
is
basically
prerequisite
for
any
of
this
to
happen.
So,
let's
now
jump
into
what
would
a
strategy
like
look
like
first
status?
What
would
crossroads
activism
look
like
what
should
we
do?
This
is
just
an
example
and
just
for
people
to
kind
of
get
an
idea
and
then
we'll
go
into
next
steps
later.
A
So
we
have
our
core
message
which
we'll
talk
about
in
a
second,
and
we
have
here
status
the
community
and
the
core
contributors
who
are
there,
and
you
know
we
have
people
who
understand
what
sex
is
trying
to
achieve
and
and
build,
and
at
that
point
you
bring
in,
for
example,
journalists
who
are
like-minded
or
talk
about
stories
that
relate
to
status,
for
example
on
privacy,
around
security,
around
internet
surveillance.
You
have
other
advocacy
rooms
like
the
eff
eff,
who
are
kind
of
the
most
aligned
with
statuses
principles
that
you
partner
with
work
with.
A
You
have
think-tanks
you
produce
researched
and
look
into
this
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
than
just
advocacy
groups,
and
then
you
also
have
influencers.
So
these
are
people.
You
know
with
a
lot
of
sway,
a
lot
of
social
capital
who
people
listen
to
on
these
topics
like
cryptography.
Reading
privacy
Snowden
is
an
example
of
an
insulin,
syringe,
miss
face,
and
so.
A
What
you
want
to
do
is
you
want
to
take
this
core
message
and
work
with
kind
of
this
sphere,
so
this
is
just
an
example,
as
I
said,
yeah,
it's
up
to
us
to
figure
out
what
makes
sense.
So
what
is
the
core
message?
So
here
is
an
example
kind
of
core
message,
which
is
what
a
status.
Why
should
anyone
care
about
what
a
status
is
trying
to.
C
C
A
Of
course
you
want
to
work
with
us,
or
collaborate
with
us
is
relatively
minions
and
then
finally,
for
people
like
influencers
or
these
advocacy
groups
are
journalists.
Why
should
they
care?
Why,
like?
Why
would
I
want
to
invest
my
personal
political,
social
capital
for
status?
Why
should
I
endorse
it?
Why
should
I
partner?
So
these
are
all
you
know
when
you're
thinking
about
your
core
message.
These
are
the
things
that
mean
want
to
explain
and
then
moving
on
from
that.
These
are
open
questions
for
for
statuses,
as
a
team
for
us
to
think
about.
I.
A
Don't
have
the
answers
to
these,
so
something
that
we
need
to
consider
one
is:
is
the
message
that
we're
taking
to
these
groups
about
status
or
about
web
3
like
is
a
promise
of
decentralization
and
social
communication,
something
that's
only
status
and
delivery?
That's
an
open
question,
for,
secondly,
is
status:
tap.
Is
it
like?
Is
it
your
passport
to
this
decentralized
world?
Is
it
the
Dow
what
it
like?
What
is
status
if
it's
just
a
happen?
A
You
know
one
of
the
with
this
whole
Cambridge
analytical
thing:
that's
come
out.
Web
3
is
kind
of
positioned
itself
to
be
the
solution
to
a
lot
of
the
problems
that
have
happened
around
around
data
centralization
and
people
using
the
data
for
promoting.
You
know
a
whole
variety
of
things
right
and
so
yeah.
Are
we
going
to
position
status
to
be?
A
All
right,
I'll
take
better
than
none
all
right,
so
next
steps.
If
we
were
to
go
into
this
and
it's
not
something
we
want
to
rush
into
you
know,
let's
contact
50
organization,
let's
go
talk
to
them
tomorrow.
What
is
what
is
that
core
message?
Who
are
the
think,
tanks,
advocacy
groups,
journalists,
influencers
and
we
want
to
work
with,
and
then
what
would
success?
Look
like
for
for
first
Attucks,
so
there's
a
slack
channel
called
grassroots
come
and
join
a
riot
channel
as
well,
so
anyone
can
can
can
come
in
share
their
ideas.
A
Ideally,
what
we
could
get
is
a
group
of
less
than
8
people
just
have
a
manageable
size
who
can
dedicate
a
certain
number
of
hours
per
week
and
to
actually
cross
this
core
message
in
allies
and
supporters
over
the
next
month
or
two
and
then
hopefully
in
Prague.
We
can
all
get
together
and
actually
like
finalize
it
and
then
think
about
what
it
looks
like
to
move
forward.
On
top
of
that,
I
think
we
also
need
to
think
considering.
A
The
prerequisite
for
for
a
lot
of
the
organizations
are
inclusivity
and
breaking
barriers
of
communication
and
touring.
The
lines
between
core
contributors
and
members
of
a
community,
we
should
not
have
this
distinction.
So
what
are
some
barriers
to
inclusive?
A
that
you
see
and
in
my
mind
we
have
slack
to
riot.
There's
like
a
clear
divide
there.
You
need
to
get
rid
of
that
by
granting
the
status
and
shoul
should
solve
that
and
then
creating
a
platform.
Collaboration
is
also
very
difficult,
so
we
have.
A
A
And
then,
finally,
if
you,
if
you
have
ideas
or
you
have
certain
thoughts
about
how
to
remove
these
barriers,
just
follow,
discuss
post
trap
to
people
or
to
the
people
whose
channel
and
let's
actually
remove
them
and
there's
an
interesting
example,
called
bureaucracy
Buster's,
which
a
lot
of
organizations
use
which
is
base.
These
are
things
that
are
very
annoying.
A
B
B
They
solve
real
pressing
problems
for
people,
and
that
is
a
core
I.
Think
part
of
this
is
that
there's
a
really
positive
story
to
tell
so.
The
question
is:
what's
the
most
effective
way
to
spread
that
story
and
to
get
people
to
understand
it
and
to
and
to
see
how
it
relates
to
their
own
lives,
to
their
own
communities
and
to
yeah
see
see
how
web
3
addresses
many
of
the
problems
that
exist
in
the
current
online
world.
So
that's
just
a
bit
of
background.
C
A
Think
that's
very
subjective
right
from
my
perspective,
no,
not
really
token
ownership
is
like
you,
you
may
have
some
financial
incentive
to
be
involvement.
You
know
from
a
mental
perspective,
I,
don't
think
it's
something
you
think
about
I.
Think
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
may
own
have
an
ownership
or
of
other
kind
of
crypto
companies,
but
don't
actually
want
to
be
involved.
A
C
And
then
I
mean
to
follow
up
on
that,
then,
would
you
say
perhaps
token
usage
is
perhaps
a
better
representation
of
them.
Yeah
participation,
I,
guess
I'm
trying
it
is
like
wait,
draw
the
line
between
what
defines
it
is
it?
Is
it
earning
a
bit
of
S&T?
Is
it
using
that
S&T
to
say
our
email
server
when
the
S&T
cluster
don't
node
in
the
cluster
yeah
yeah?
That's
what
I'm
yeah.
A
C
A
I,
don't
have
a
I,
don't
have
the
straight
answer
for
that
I
think
that's
a
good
question.
I
mean
I.
Think
a
lot
of
it
depends
on
the
intent.
Well
that
and
the
awareness
of
people
like
contributing.
So,
for
example,
if
you're,
if
you
are
generating
a
Zen
team,
because
you're
a
moss
and
Roman
Network
and
you're
like
excited
to
be
part
of
this
decent
life
movement
like
and
you're.
That's
your
motivating
reason
right.
A
It's
like
hey
I'm,
helping
that
for
me
as
participation,
but
if
you're
like,
if
you
accidentally,
you
know,
get
on
board
and
then
you
have
this
thing
called
SMT
and
you
just
use
it
in
a
daily
bath
like
is
that
is
that
someone
who's
like
really
participating
I,
don't
think
so!
I,
don't
know
I,
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
I.
Don't
know
if,
like
SNT
specifically,
is
a
good
proxy
for
engagement,
it
could
be
I'm
just
not
sure.
G
A
F
A
Yeah,
so
my
personal
take
is
that
you
know
the
only
difference
with
core
contributors,
and
anyone
from
the
community
is
that
core
contributors
are
spending
their
hours
to
participate
in
status
for
like
for
financial
compensation
to
make
up
for
them
to
like
live
their
lives
right.
So
if
someone
spending
full-time
working
on
status
in
the
contributor,
then
you
probably
need
something
to
like
pay
the
rent,
and
you
know
if
we,
if
they
are
like.
So,
at
least
in
my
mind,
that's
the
only
distinction.
There
should
be
no
distinction
from
an
access
information
participation.
F
See
it
is,
there's
got
to
be
something
a
little
more
to
it
might.
In
my
personal
perspective,
because
from
coming
from
a
security
perspective,
we
have
certain
types
of
things
that,
if
are
accessed
by
anyone,
can
be
broken
very
easily,
and
so
we
have
to
then
elevate
some
people
to
some
amount
of
responsibilities.
They
can
protect
those
types
of
Secrets
to
maintain
like
a
quality
signal
from
status.
Otherwise
it
can
be
compromised
very
quickly.
Yeah.
G
So
I
said:
yeah
hi
everybody
so
yeah.
That's
why
I've
been
talking
about
permission,
permission,
lessness,
I
know
what
we're
talking
about
here
are
our
webs
of
trust
and
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
build
our
own
web
of
trust
with
core
contributors
and
now
we're
gonna,
hopefully
see
nodes
that
are
extending
that
web
of
trust
and
I.
Don't
I,
don't
think
that
we
can
get
away
from
from
having
you
know
some
type
of
permissioned
granular
permissions,
granular
permissions
for
people
to
participate
in
the
network.
G
A
H
A
Once
you
probably
need
some
sort
of
permission
access
to
these
channels,
so
their
needs
there.
For
practical
reasons,
probably
is
a
couple
things
and
to
secure
the
network
and
to
maintain
trust
of
the
people
in
in
the
community
at
large
or
anyone
using
the
app
there
will
be.
There
will
need
to
be
some
permissions.
So
perhaps,
if
you
look
at
that
quadrant
we
may
not
be
in
that
far
top
right
corner,
but
we
are
as
closer
to
it
as
as
as
possible.
As
a
reminder,
I
feel.
G
A
G
G
You
know
all
kinds
of
propaganda
about
it,
so
I
think
we
really
need
to
be
concerned
about
you,
know
the
state
monopoly
on
power
and
and
how
it
is
that
we
that
we
are
acting
in
that
in
that
case
and
how
it
is
it
we're
gonna
deal
with
when
when
we're
demonized,
so
each
of
those
movements
were
were
demonized
politically
and
in
terms
of
propaganda
and
might
even
be
a
so
a
measure
of
success
when
it
is
that
that
happens.
But
it's
definitely
something
that
we
have
to
be
prepared
for.
B
I
think
I
think
that's
right,
that
it's
important
to
prepare
for
various
kinds
of
backlash,
but
also
especially
early
on
I,
think
there's
an
incredibly
positive
story
to
tell
so
I
I
think
like
it's.
It's
really
important
to
build
momentum
around
the
positives
and
then
but
I
think.
Your
point
is
I.
Think
the
important
part
of
what
is
important
as
well
is
to
be
thinking
about
potential
backlash,
but
but
especially
with
with
sort
of
building
awareness
and
consciousness,
and
support
among
a
much
wider
group
of
people.
B
A
H
Maps
so
I
think
that's
like
you
of
all
people,
also
well
aware
of
the
irony
of
trying
to
organize
the
grassroots
movements
and
the
sort
of
sense
of
humor
that's
required
for
for
some
of
what
goes
along
with
it.
But
I
wonder
like
one
of
the
things
that
I've
been
thinking
about
a
little
bit
recently.
Is
that
as
we
scale
out
and
as
you
get
like
more
and
more
people
coming
into
the
organization,
the
amount
of
information
that's
like
coming
at
core
contributors,
who's,
obviously
increasing
massively
and
so
like.
H
It
would
be
really
interesting
to
think
about
how
these
sort
of
initiatives,
if
you
do
gather
that
team
of
seven
or
eight
people
in
the
channel
that
are
able
to
like
contribute
time
every
week.
If
like
this,
can
be
one
of
the
first
ways
in
which
to
experiment
with
like
swarms
and
teams
that
are
putting
information
out
rather
than
like
bouncing
it
around
within
the
organization
right,
because
that's
kind
of
what's
getting
difficult
to
manage
of
the
moment.
H
Isn't
it
like,
with
all
of
these
incredibly
creative
and
productive
and
amazing
people
coming
in,
but
then
like
only
sort
of
working
on
mostly
like
internal
focused
projects
that
becomes
more
and
more
difficult
for
us
to
deal
with
so
like
if
the
outputs
of
the
this
work
is
much
more
public
and
public
from
the
get-go?
That
would
be
like
an
interesting
model
to
to
explore.
If
you
get
what
I'm
trying
to
20.
A
Of
that's
so
basically
making
sure
that
I
guess
the
the
work
that
the
group
is
doing
has
full
transparency
and
they're
also
trying
to
solve
a
problem
of
how
to
get
when
people
are
coming
and
engaging
with
the
status
even
right
now,
what
is
the
best
way
to
to
get
them
included
and
involved
in
whatever
we're
doing
so?
Basically,
the
part
of
the
participation
scale
type
thing
is
that
what
you're
getting
on
yeah.
H
Yeah,
it's
something
that
bets
and
also
you
know
like
I,
think
that,
as
we
scale
that
one
of
the
features
that
bridge
is
gonna
have
to
get
used
to
is
the
fact.
That's
like
you
can't
get
everybody
sign
off
for
the
stuff
that
you're
doing,
and
then
you
know
it's
it's
a
question
of
making
sure
that
you
justs,
like
connect
with
the
people
that
you
do
need
to
discuss
the
stuff
with,
without
necessarily
impacting
too
much
on
the
workload
of
other
people
in
the
organization.
H
So
it's
like
one
of
my
concerns
around
like
peer
review,
for
instance
right
is
that
person
yet
another
thing:
that's
a
lot
of
people
across
the
organization.
I'm
gonna
have
to
deal
with
and
work
into
there.
Well,
in
this
case
six
monthly
workflow.
But
it's
you
know
like
it's
yet
another
like
organization,
ID
thing
and
like
the
more
of
those
that
we
add
to
the
burden
of
core
contributors,
the
less
work
that
they're
going
to
be
doing
on
actually
like
building.
H
A
H
Has
to
be
okay
with
that,
giving
away
your
Lego
box
and,
being
like
cool
like
you,
guys,
go
and
do
this.
It's
gonna
be
really
interesting
to
see
what
the
results
are
and
my
contending
status
into
a
brand.
That's
robust
enough
to
survive.
Different
teams
experimenting
with
different
ways
of
like
telling
the
organizational
tale
or
us
there
was
there's
one
kind.
A
Of
bend
diagram
that
I
didn't
put
any
that
I
removed
from
it,
which
basically,
at
least
from
a
personal
mental
model,
I
kind
of
see
like
the
status
product
being
built
as
like
this.
This
in
here,
which,
at
the
end
of
the
day
for
end
users,
is
like
it's
a
utility
right.
It's
like
here's,
an
app
that
works.
It
does
X
Y,
&,
Z
and
I.
Think
we
have
like
95
percent
of
the
team
focused
on
like
this
end
utility,
which
is
you
know
it's
an
app.
It
does
things.
E
I
have
a
question
on
the
nature
of
classrooms
movements.
So
what
I
usually
associate
present
movements
with
kind
of
short
short
movements
that
have
a
specific
goal,
that
they
were
succeeded
in
or
not
do
ease
of
the
same
mental
model?
What
is
the
specific
agenda
and
it
gets
either
successful?
It's
not
or
if
it's
something
more
long-lasting
like
what
are
some
examples
of
so
yeah
I
mean
movements
that
last
for
like
decades,
not
just
like
a
few
years
and
just
a
fad
that
makes
sense.
A
That's
a
good
question:
I
mean
I
think
we
can
beat
his
interest
an
example
of
a
movement
that
would
be
like
if
participation
was
a
simple,
would
just
keep
scaling
and
keep
scaling,
keep
growing
and
give
it
into
a
bunch
of
different
things.
It's
relatively
permission,
and
then
you
have
like
these
core
people
that
are
helping
to
direct
it
when
Jimmy.
Well,
let's
embrace
those
guys,
but
that's
an
interesting
example
of
one
that
doesn't
have
an
end
per
se.
It
has
a
mission
and
people
around
behind
that
mission.
I
think
the.
A
That
we
gave
around
me
to
occupy
potentially
having
if
there
was
a
goal
in
mind
and
policy
had
changed
to
follow
what
they
had.
It
looked
like
what
those
movements
would
focus
on
with
the
movement
fizzle
out,
I,
don't
know
what
the
movement
then
pivot
to
something
else,
I'm,
not
sure,
but
what
what
you
also
touched
on
is
a
lot
of
these
things
like
what
is
what
are
we
trying
to?
What
is
our
core
message?
What
does
it
go?
What
would
success
be
like
those
are
going.
G
Back
to
occupy
I
mean
it
actually
has
lived
very,
very
long.
It
inspired
people
all
over
the
globe
across
many
many
countries
and
is
still
alive,
even
though
it
started
out
as
a
grassroots
American
movement.
It
actually
went
global
and,
and
that's
had
legs
and
and
I-
think
that
if
our
message
and
and
and
our
goals
have
legs
in
and
of
themselves,
that
will
that
will
happen
and
and
and
so
starting
out
from
a
grassroots
perspective
is
I.
Don't
I,
don't
really
see
as
being
limiting
you
can't
you
can't
be
global
without
starting.
E
So
I
wonder
if
there's
something
maybe
there's
some
parallels
like
even
going
the
further
back.
You
think,
because
you
mentioned
that
you
could
utility
at
the
same
time,
but
maybe
something
like
would
either
the
internet
even
further
by
attracted
printing
press
were
actually
creating
utility,
that's
useful
for
hundreds
of
years
after
the
fact,
but
maybe
it
was
also
a
movement
around
literacy.
Maybe
there
wasn't
I,
don't
know
I
feel
like
that
would
be
insane
to
look
into
something
of
lasting
for
longer
than
like
those
five
years.
But
there's
a
kid.
A
There's
a
couple
stories
around
car
manufacturers
working
to
change
policy
around
like
the
overall
driving,
don't
drive
this
car,
but
you
know
back
in
the
day
they
had,
you
had
to
have
to
drive
a
car.
You
need
I
think
is
a
nothing
I'm,
not
sure,
but
back
in
the
day,
you
need
to
have
a
car.
You
need
to
driver,
as
well
as
like
someone
to
help
you
navigate
streets.
A
So
there's
like
three
people
involved
in
the
driving
a
car
and
then
they
push
through
policy
change
to
actually
change
that,
and
this
was
not
coming
from
the
car.
This
was
not
flying
this
car,
but
it
was
changing.
The
ecosystem,
which
brings
back
to
like
this
question
here
is
like
number
one
are
we
is.
It
is
the
end
goal
like
download
status
or
is
the
end
goal?
Hey,
there's
this
decentralized
web.
We
don't
care
what
you
use.
You
should
be
aware
of
it.
So
what
it?
E
Would
find
an
interesting
exercise
just
to
look
at
like
bigger
things
have
a
way
way
back
like
I'm,
also
talking
about
like
if
you
give
us
revolution
and
French
Revolution
and
printing
press
and
Internet,
and
these
things
that
have
like
significant
impact,
III
I,
don't
mean
to
be
like
down
on
Wikipedia
black
lives
matter
and
so
on,
but
due
to
media
fairly
local
phenomena
that
are
just
a
few
years
old
and
even
in
the
case
of
the
Camellia,
which
is
supposed
to
a
success.
It's
not
it's.
B
Another
another
in
that
vein.
Another
thing
to
think
about
is
the
history
of
the
Internet
itself,
without
sort
of
getting
into
that
now,
but
just
to
think
about
the
origins
and
then
how
things
evolved
and
the
different
influences
around
that
so
that
that
that's
just
another
example
like
that.
So
yeah.
D
A
Yeah
this
is
yeah,
that's
an
excellent
question
and
I.
Don't
and
I
personally,
like
I
have
an
opinion,
but
it's
a
bit
irrelevant,
like
you
know,
I
think
it's
it's
a
question
of.
Can
we
find
like
mine,
elimination?
One
thing
that
I
do
have
a
pretty
strong
opinion
on
is
the
fact
that,
like
the
message
we
do
deliver
is
not
within
the
lightest
on
blockchain
of
web,
through
specific,
like
talking
about
statuses
of
mobile
OS
for
aetherium
is
meaningless
for
99.99%
of
the
world,
so
we
need
to
tell
a
story
beyond.
A
Just
like
you
know,
aetherium
is
good
because
decentralization
like
what
does
that
mean
for
me,
how
does
that
like
right
now,
I
use
Instagram,
Facebook
and
whatsapp
I
I.
Don't
particularly
care.
You
know
about
using
these
things.
So
so
that's
that's
all
very
interesting
and
important.
I
guess
an
important
things
that
to
kind
of
think
about.
F
I
have
a
perspective
on
that,
like
my
I
guess,
my
interpretation
of
our
principles
and
how
it
applies
broader
space
is
that
we've
chosen
doing
something
that
I
think
the
majority
of
the
ecosystem,
even
outside
of
the
theory
I'm
like
Bitcoin
so
forth,
but
aligned
with,
but
we've
chosen
to
work
on
a
theorem,
because
we
feel
we
can
do
the
most.
We
can
I
guess
instantiate
those
principles
and
make
a
product
that
does
the
most
good
building
on
top
of
aetherium
when
the
technology
arrives.
F
That
allows
us
to
spread
across
the
entire
ecosystem
will
do
that
because
we're
following
the
core
principles
and
not
necessarily
aetherium
and
and
is
the
message
I
think
we
should
we
should
have.
We
should
convey
more
often
than
not,
and
if
people
agree
with
that
which
they
should,
if
they're
I
guess
true
to
their
principles,
then
they'll
adopt
what
we're
trying
to
do.
As
long
as
we
are
openly
trying
to
make
which
forth
like
communicating
with
those
communities,
I.
A
Think
those
ten
principles
we
have
are
like
they're,
not
blockchain,
specific
or
a
feared
and
specific.
Those
are
the
ten
principles
of
websiteĆs
is
trying
to
achieve,
and
that's
how
we
need
to
frame
our
search.
There
are
other
people
in
the
theorem.
Yukos
doesn't
want
to
join
and
great,
but
it's
definitely
not
exclusive
thing
and
we
should
probably
start
thinking
about
branching
outside
of
the
not
but
a
little
bit
like
the
the
social
groups
that
we
are
looking
at
right
now
and
then
think
about
okay.
What
would
you
know?
A
Privacy,
advocacy
groups,
you
know
AFF
or
there
there's
conferences
around
this
stuff
that
we're
not
really
we're
not
there
at
all
right.
So
it's
kind
of
broadening
the
horizons
and
then
thinking
about
what
is
the
message
that
status
is
trying
to
tell
without
relying
on
someone
knowing
what
a
DEP
is.