|13 Jul 2010 @ 02:25, by erlefrayne. Peace|
As we get filled electrified with the euphoria of the world soccer games, the Koreans’ dread over a possible war among brothers has been on the uptrend. Let’s just hope that the world cup season has relaxed the rather tense nerves of the Koreans and Japanese as well who rabidly dread Bombs from North Korea. More >
|12 Jul 2010 @ 09:06, by Unknown. Environment, Ecology|
HUMAN ENERGY USE CAP AND FREEZE
July 12, 2010, Earth, Monday, Dawn
In 2008, we, humanity were using about 474 Exajoules of energy per year.
If we humanity, will not and won't at some point cap or freeze our own global energy use and waste
and addiction, then who will and when?
I think thus and then, right now, limiting ourselves humanity, to 474 Exajoules of energy per year right now and here in 2010 and for such per year for the foreseeable future is more than sufficient to live satisfactory and successful lives.
When there is no more, then we just have to do without, that is how it was and how it has always been and perhaps how it always will be.
Various Internet and Media Sources 2010 More >
|11 Jul 2010 @ 14:31, by jhs. Ideas, Creativity|
Germany arrived at the very last second of the match for the third place [link] of the Worldcup 2010 with a one goal lead and the Mexican referee granted a free kick [link] to the team of Uruguay.
I heard a scream in my head "Don't look! Don't look!". It was my mother, God bless her, who raised from her grave to give me one more advice. She was convinced that 'not looking' would help to avert such serious danger. And so it did! I turned my head away, and, and, and, Forlan hit the cross bar. [link]
It worked!!! Both my mother and Quantum Theory were right on! Thank you for all!
But then, some people do the opposite, they STARE at an event to make it work. Whatever the resulting eigenvalue may sum up to, that is the big question.
The property of non-locality of the 'hidden variable' postulated by Einstein, Podolsky (not the one in the German soccer team!), Rosen, Bohm, etc pp is still at debate for whoever cares to argue about.
Meanwhile our ancestors, riding the wave across time through our memories, are still acting up to lend their support to vital questions such as national honor and whether eggs should be fried with butter or with olive oil.
For my part I am convinced that the question of the 'hidden variables', aka Quantum Potential, has been solved thousands of years ago through the system of Ifá and its 256 possible potentials; 256 of them, not 242 as Alain Aspect and Paul Kwiat have counted [link] .
The proof is in the pudding, of course, as we all know (and our mothers, too): the moment you look, it already changes. And if you don't look, whoever plays Germany will hit the cross bar instead of making a goal! This is the crux of quantum events and Ifá alike: you can never prove it being correct using the established 'scientific method' [link], the Pater Noster [link] of Science, the post-positivistic religion of our times.
Well, I shall use the few hours before the final of the wordcup 2010 to meditate once more about the ancient Koan "are the hidden variables of Ifá (the 'Odu') local or non-local"? Please join me in my meditation! Dive deep into the morphogenetic field and the living memory of our ancestors to find the solution to all the questions that were never asked! More >
| 10 Jul 2010 @ 22:18, by anandavala. Spirituality|
Let me relate to you a short story as an introduction to the real
subject of this article – the mathematical / metaphysical
foundations of a unified holistic science.
I was 21, working as a taxi driver and quite deeply 'absorbed'
with what one might call the occult, in particular Western Esoteric
(Kabbalistic) Ritual High Magick. However from surface appearances I
was "just a taxi driver".
During this time somehow the thought entered my awareness that "I
will descend into the swamp of modernity wherein I will find and
retrieve a 'Jewel of Immeasurable Worth' that lies unnoticed."
I didn't know what it meant - but the idea grew – not just an
intellectual idea, but an inspiring force. It hovered just beneath
the conscious mind; floating on the 'surface' of the subconscious.
Six months or so later another idea surfaced - "I will study
physics and computer science at Uni next year." And I did - all
up for about 5 years. ######## More >
| 10 Jul 2010 @ 13:01, by ming. Internet|
There's something fundamentally messed up about the way we store and use information. Most of our information connects really badly with related information, and with the stuff the information is about.
I've talked about that before, like here: Connected Information, so I'll try not to repeat myself. It is however, somewhat difficult to convey my point. I've tried writing and rewriting this as an article a couple of times, but left it unfinished. It still isn't coming out very clear, but I'll leave it at that.
I want information to be linked, by unbreakable elastic links, to what the information is about.
The type of links we know on the web are useful, way more useful than no links. But they're but a pathetic shadow of the type of links we potentially could have that truly would be useful and reliable.
I'm sure it is not only me who have found some interesting article on the net or in a magazine about something new and promising. Say, self-driving cars or super-efficient solar cells. And then, months later, when I try to search for information about how that project might be going now, there's no trace of it. Some journalist did some kind of investigative job and wrote about something. On the web it might even include some clickable links to more information, like another article or a company website. When I come back some months later, those might still be there, or they might not. It is quite likely those links would point to some frozen information from that same time period. What happened later might remain a mystery, unless I have the time and resources to do a fresh piece of detective work.
The links we use on the web are like addresses on an envelope that we put in a mailbox. They indicate some kind of coordinates for a recipient. "He's over there!" But he might not be. The address might have changed and become invalid, or it might now be occupied by somebody else who has no relation to the person I'm trying to reach. The links don't follow the target when it moves. Likewise, web links aren't very good at linking up real people or real subjects.
Part of the problem is that the web links are one-way pointers. They just point in the direction of some virtual place. That place doesn't easily know that they're being linked to, because there's no link the other way. So, even if they wanted to, they couldn't easily update others on the status of what they linked to. Even if they could, it would still be a cumbersome thing to do.
Links shouldn't just be some address. They should actually link the two things.
The reason you have problems with spam is because the contents of the e-mail messages you receive don't really link up with anything. There's an address for the sender and the recipient, and addresses for servers that have processed the e-mail. All of that can be arbitrarily made up by anybody, because the e-mail doesn't actually link to the sender and the recipient. It can say all sorts of stuff that isn't at all true, or it can say things that were true at some point, but which go out of date later.
Imagine that you could attach a link to something, and that link, without a doubt, would maintain the connection, no matter what.
For the moment, never mind how it could be done, but imagine that between all people, all groups, all subjects and all media about any of these things, between all of those there would be unbreakable links. Hard links, so to speak, or strong links, but elastic, as they will "stretch" to any length no matter how the nodes move around and transform.
You probably know what school you went to in a certain year. That school is a rather finite entity. It should not be a matter of archaeological detective work to retrieve the information of who the principal was, and what became of any of the teachers or any one of the students. The school was an unmistakable entity. It was there, very physically, it had buildings, it was paid for, it stayed there for a long time. The same with all the people who were there. Every single one was unmistakably a real, living, breathing person. There's really nothing fuzzy about it at all. But in accordance with the way we typically treat information, it has been saved in a very fuzzy manner. If you go search for your school in search engines, there is likely to be some doubt about what school you're talking about, and whether it even exists. It is going to be very hard to locate a list of teachers or a complete list of students, if one exists. The information was kept on pieces of paper, which might have been mislaid or lost or falsified, and maybe never digitized. Even if you found the list, you wouldn't know if it was the right one, and even if you did, it is only a list of names and maybe addresses and maybe a photo. Most of these people have moved, many of them have changed their names, some have died, etc. It would be a huge amount of work to track them down, and you'd probably have to give up on quite a few of them.
We've gotten so used to sloppy, unlinked information that we find it quite natural and normal that information gets lost or that it is hard to reconstruct or that nobody knows if it is true or not. We even find a certain comfort and security in all this fuzziness. There's no government that is sure how many people there are in the country it governs. And that's despite that they really want taxes from all of them, and they don't want illegal immigrants, and everybody needs an ID. And the subject matter, persons, is in no way vague. It isn't difficult to decide if somebody is a person or not. They're very finite and the number of people is finite.
The moment you commit information to little bits of paper and sloppy handwriting and filing cabinets and vague references to other storage places, the game is lost. The link between the information and what it is about is no longer there. It isn't much better if the same system is simulated with computers. Useful information can often be reconstructed, but there's nothing that guarantees that.
In the electronic world, we should by now be able to do much better. There's absolutely no reason to store our information in the same sloppy manner, lists of names and addresses in files that can be lost and falsified, or, worse, in free unstructured text form that also is stored in fairly random places, without real links to the subject matter.
What I'm asking for is, in part, two-way links, as one can pull the string from either side. But it is also unbreakable links, not just pointers. Not just signs that point in the general direction of the other piece of information. Rather, something like an electrical wire. The moment somebody cuts it, an alarm goes off. Or a quantum entanglement kind of mechanism, where you just can't mess with it without it being noticed.
How can one practically implement it? I didn't say I knew how, just that I want it, and that everything we do with information would totally change if we had reliable links. But it is not like it is an unsolvable problem. It would in no way be impossible to provide each living person with a unique encrypted ID code. There are certainly issues of politics and of privacy, and of identity theft, but they could be solved if there were any unified wish to have unique IDs. As it is now, it is in most places a no-brainer to acquire multiple ID numbers or to disappear to somewhere else.
The same applies to things, places, organized groups, subjects, etc. Information is as sloppily kept as for people, or more. A car at least has an ID number, but it is only used by government agencies, not for recording your photos or car trips or anything else.
A lot of stuff might deserve being very loosely joined, but not facts. A piece of information that is or could be a fact when recorded shouldn't later be a matter of searching and guessing. You should know its level of correctness by the way it is linked, not by some forensic text analysis.
Our shared information system has Alzheimer's. Real events instantly get converted into vague guesswork and conjecture and interpretation and stories and remixed soundbites. And then we expect to pour all of that stuff together, have a machine sort it all, and then we'll discover how really smart we are?
We'd probably get somewhere faster if we at least could keep most of the objective stuff straight, and then we could use our imagination and reasoning abilities for more important stuff than merely trying to reconstruct what is going on. More >
|9 Jul 2010 @ 11:07, by Unknown. Ideas, Creativity|
The Purpose of the Day
The purpose of the day is to meet our needs,
and then our wants,
and then our dreams,
and then I suppose all those vain and useless things we
are at liberty and foolishness to sometimes desire.
And then to rest and behold dawn breaks and we
find and renew our purpose once again.
A. G. Jonas
(c) July 2010
Canada More >
|9 Jul 2010 @ 01:54, by anandavala. Investigation, Intelligence|
Quote from the Lankavatara Sutra http://bit.ly/azCaUY
"So long as people do not understand the true nature of the
objective world, they fall into the dualistic view of things. They
imagine the multiplicity of external objects to be real and become
attached to them and are nourished by their habit energy. Because of
this system of mentation, mind and what belongs to it is
discriminated and is thought of as real; this leads to the assertion
of an ego-soul and its belongings, and thus the mind-system goes on
functioning. Depending upon and attaching itself to the dualistic
habit of mind, they accept the views of the philosophers founded upon
these erroneous distinctions, of being and non-being, existence and
non-existence, and there evolves what we call false-imaginations...
False-imaginations rise from the consideration of appearances;
things are discriminated as to form, signs and shape; as to having
colour, warmth, humidity, mobility or rigidity. False-imagination
consists of becoming attached to these appearances and their names...
The five sense functions and their discriminating and thinking
function have their risings and complete ending from moment to
moment... By setting up names and forms greed is multiplied and thus
the mind goes on mutually conditioning and being conditioned. By
becoming attached to names and forms, not realising that they have no
more basis than the activities of the mind itself, error arises,
false-imagination as to pleasure and pain arises, and the way to
emancipation is blocked...
By the cessation of the mind-system as a whole is meant, the
cessation of discrimination, the clearing away of the various
attachments, and, therefore, the clearing away of the defilements of
habit-energy in the face of Universal Mind which have been
accumulating since beginningless time by reason of these
discriminations, attachments, erroneous reasonings, and following
acts... Getting rid of the discriminating mortal-mind is Nirvana.
But the cessation of the discriminating-mind cannot take place
until there has been a “turning about” in the deepest seat of
consciousness. The mental habit of looking outward by the
discriminating-mind upon an external objective world must be given
up, and a new habit of realising Truth within the intuitive-mind by
becoming one with the Truth itself must be established.... With the
ending of pleasure and pain, of conflicting ideas, of the disturbing
interests of egoism, a state of tranquilisation will be attained in
which the truths of emancipation will be fully understood..."
(Lankavatara Sutra http://bit.ly/azCaUY
| 8 Jul 2010 @ 02:27, by ming. Communication|
A couple of comments to my recent articles made me consider the importance of truth in effective collaboration networks. How can people truly connect if their connection is based on lies? Maybe collective intelligence is proportional to the amount of truth in the system.
Truth can mean different things to different people, of course, and there are several angles to this. To me truth is a coherence between realities and their representations. There can be many levels of reality and many levels of abstract representations. Truth is when what you say or imply is there actually is what is there, and when you actually say what is there.
It is rather relative, but, still, we recognize truth. Have you ever experienced having a conflict with somebody else, where you dig into the defense of your separate positions, and it is really upsetting, and you judge each other as being wrong, but then at some point, some key piece of information is exchanged, and you both, at the same time, have an "Oh, that's what's going on, now I understand!" kind of realization? It is a big sigh of relief, where the conflict just instantly evaporates. You realize that you defined a key term differently, or that you made assumptions that turned out not to be true, or you used different approaches, valid in their own right, but conflicting. Truth is freeing. It opens doors, makes things flow.
Between individuals, a lack of truth is often unintentional. You just didn't realize a key difference or a missing piece of information, and you proceeded based on different assumptions. Once they're brought to light, the matter is quickly settled, and an effective collaboration or agreement can be reached.
You can control people by intentionally leaving out the truth, by presenting a picture that is different from the reality. You can make a lot of money by making some cheap crap look expensive and attractive. You get votes by leading lots of people to believe you care about their interests.
At a very practical level, you can't make very good decisions when you don't have the correct information.
That is of particular importance in networking, in cooperation and collaboration. It is of huge importance in harnessing the self-organizing power of groups, in the hope of increasing collective intelligence.
See, if every connection formed between two nodes in a network is based on lies and misinformation, not much synergy is achieved, and the connections will not be very effective. Imagine that each node in a network provides some kind of statement of "This is what I'm about. This is what I provide. This is what I need." and nodes connect with each other based on that, then it is important that such statements approximately represent something actual. If the people who say they provide funding have no money, and the people who repair cars don't know anything about cars, and the people who take care of children don't like kids, and the people who say they can fix things have no clue how - obviously the wrong connections are being made. You don't get the right people for the job, you don't find the right collaborators, you don't get the laundry detergent with the best price/quality ratio.
It might not make sense to describe it mathematically, but these errors in connection will certainly add up quickly, maybe exponentially. If you're trying to do something big, or you're part of a big network, these kinds of errors in connection might easily add up to making the whole thing completely ineffective.
Conversely, if you create a network of true connections, where it is clear what each node does, what is supplies, and what is needed, it starts scaling. Imagine the kind of superconductivity that takes place when all information is complete, relevant and correct. Self-organization can scale rapidly if there's little loss of integrity from untruth in each connection.
Currently, most types of organization are having a problem there. Even the very small organization of a single relationship between two people. Even people who've been married for years typically have a considerable problem saying the truth and relating based primarily on what is true. So, even more so, the more people you put together.
Our current civilization is to a large degree based on manipulation through untruth, by the few, of the many, exactly because we aren't good at cooperating truthfully.
The majority of the population in the industrialized world are employees. They produce a value for somebody else which is, on the average, a lot higher than the value they're being paid. They do that in part because they don't know how to produce that value on their own, and in part because they don't know the value of what they're producing. The reason they don't know those things is because the information isn't easily available. Rather, they're presented with entirely different and misleading information, emphasizing the stability of their situation, their benefits, their rights, random entertainment, weather and traffic reports, etc.
It typically isn't a matter of evil intentions on the part of the few who control the many. It is currently the most pragmatic and efficient choice. It is relatively more practical and productive to borrow money to create a company and hire a bunch of people and tell them what to do than it is to participate in a bottom-up self-organizing network of the same number of people. Not always. Sometimes small groups of people will freely do something great, without coercion, without needing payment. It is still a bit of an exception, but it is an important enough exception to indicate significant future possibilities. Sometimes open source communities will create a great product, fairly efficiently, for free, because a number of people voluntarily gather around a need or a solution, communicated clearly and truthfully enough so that they all can sense it, in one form or another.
Fuzzy projects and problems aren't yet easily undertaken by cooperative groups. Oh, strictly hierarchical groups are on their way out, but corporate network-like structures are still based on a hierarchy of control. The top still pays salaries and reaps the profit and outlines what one should work on, even if the finer details are loose.
There is lots of good information easily available. But huge areas are covered only by wildly misleading information, or information is largely missing, and that fact is well hidden. Do you think you know how most people make their money, or how large cooperations make their money? Sure, you can easily learn the average salaries of people in different professions, and the type of work they do, and you can easily look up the profits for public companies. But what actually is going on is mired in many layers of obfuscation.
Good information is something you readily can act upon and use. If I don't know how to fix the faucet in the bathroom, and I receive the right information, then I'll be able to fix the faucet. Maybe I first need to go to Home Depot and get a tool or a part, but that would be part of the good information, and I can still get the result I seek, right here, today.
There are plenty of outfits that will promise you similarly readymade information on how to make a good living doing one thing or another. Say, Internet Marketing or MLM. But once you receive that $2000 get rich quick manual or your supply of MLM vitamins, you discover that the instructions just don't get you there. They might be technically correct, and they might even give you a good overview and teach you something, but they're leaving out the specific information you would need to act in an effective way.
I have lots of friends online and offline. Yet I'm not really sure what to do with most of them. I mean, what can I do for them, what can they do for me? Oh, we don't have to do business in order to be friends, but if we do have something to offer or something we're looking for, it would be nice if we all knew what it was. And, I must admit, as to the majority of the people I know, I don't really know what they can do, and I probably haven't told them honestly what I need and want.
It is hard to be honest. If somebody asks me what I do or how I'm doing, I'm likely to tell them I'm fine, and things are going well, and I'll give them some general idea of what I do, which usually doesn't match neither what I actually do nor what I'd like to do. Why do I do that? In part because I myself am a little fuzzy on what it is I'm here for, and in part because I'm embarrassed if I actually need something, or I'm failing at something, and I'd like to look good. Different people have different hangups, but it is rare to get immediately actionable truth out of anybody.
Now, imagine that we were able to tell the honest truth most of the time. Imagine that it would be easy and natural to record and share the information about what really is there. Then imagine the possibility that lots of things actually would fit together when a lot of us start doing so. You know, I have something you need, you have a solution to my problem, X has the information that Y needs, A has a resource that B knows how to use. Synergy is much more likely when everything is visible.
Do our communication and collaboration tools lead us to be more or less honest? Do they increase truth, or obfuscate it? Do I have to wear a mask in order to protect myself, or do I get empowered by showing my real face?
How can we create environments where the truth is empowering?
I'm not talking about ultimate truth about the meaning of life and the universe. Simply, as I mentioned, a correspondance between what is going on and what one says is going on.
Masses of people who need to keep up appearances, trying to adhere to norms they never consciously agreed to, are relatively easy to control. They can be rendered rather harmless, as they each pursue individual rewards that don't truly match what they need and want.
If we make collaborative tools that simply reinforce our inclination to keep up appearances, they won't go far. If they only help us exchange impressively sounding declarations, abstract positions and lists of accomplishments, they won't have accomplished much.
Good information is actionable. It isn't just something to find interesting and to collect and pass on. There should preferably be something you can do about it or with it right now.
It is in itself a fairly fuzzy proposition to write an article about the need for truth in collaboration. Does that change anything? Maybe, maybe not. What is exactly the truth I'm calling for? I can only give vague examples.
There's a transparency that is needed. A lack of resistance. A matching of receptors. Things that match match. If one puts the wrong labels on stuff, one might erroneously try to match things that really don't fit.
Collective intelligence has something to do with increasing the number of opportunities for stuff to connect up, and lowering the resistance to it happening. Lacking or incorrect information are forms of resistance. Correct and complete information decreases resistance and increases connections. More >
|7 Jul 2010 @ 01:06, by Unknown. Ideas, Creativity|
THE BICYCLE PARADIGM
Well firstly my apologies perhaps, this is a rather long and perhaps absurd essay or comment of sorts but if you can stretch and grasp the thread or logic of it then perhaps it may indeed have some merit.
I'm not sure, what do you suppose "drives" the human economy to such seemingly destructive tendencies against or on the environment? Is it perhaps a flaw or quirk of some sort in and of human nature, that hampers us from being more aware or cognizant of the consequences of our behavior and actions?
Or rather, eureka, alternatively are we perhaps to smart or efficient at what we do and this over success and super predator status thus makes us to good at the job for our own and long term good? Well well, thus it may be our superiority then that is or will be our Achilles heel in the end but then granted the solution to such might then be as simple as engineering back some environmental slack into the global economic equation and system say to the tune of -10 to - 30 % say as a kind of "junk" economic data or inefficiency akin perhaps to the mysterious junk DNA found in the genome. We thus might achieve a more natural economic equation in the process by increasing selective inefficiencies akin somewhat to a kind of economic biomimicry status or model.
But true though its probably more complicated then just engineering in some haphazard inefficiencies but maybe more having some kind of selective inefficiencies that can afford some opportunities, benefits and advantages to many species other than our own in the natural dynamic, system and chain. It would be a most complex equation to design perhaps but could be assisted by reference to the field of biomimicry as a natural example or mentor of such. Such as a seasonal economy thus as well as a sustainable one.
Well glad you have humored me to this point but I will continue the case by saying that by using less efficient human labor then rather or other than machine labor such may in fact then have a basis in science and nature of necessary inefficiency, A good or simple model or example or compromise of such to grasp on to would be to take the lowly bicycle as a happy medium example of the proper human, nature and machine equation or construct to emulate further hence the title, the bicycle paradigm.
So basically then my premise is simply that maybe inefficiencies or certain kinds of inefficiencies are not totally all a bad or useless or an undesirable thing and may in fact result in a longer term, all around benefit not simply for humans but to the whole natural system of which we humans are only one part.
True I suppose it does seem somewhat counter intuitive at first glance to the logical and reasoning human mind but consider that the wisdom and logic of nature was not crafted in the machine or human time frame but over millions and billions of years and therein perhaps lies the subtle disconnect or defect in and of the humor or machine logic, sensorium and reasoning, that then, which seems to have eluded us somewhat till now.
Well maybe, seems possible if not probable or at least worth a discussion and or debate about or on perhaps..
Tue., July 6, 2010, Canada More >
|4 Jul 2010 @ 14:21, by anandavala. Spirituality|
More tweets from @anandavala at http://twitter.com/anandavala
- One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious (CarlJung)
- Our present ego-feeling is a shrunken residue of a much more inclusive all-embracing-feeling, a more intimate bond (Freud)
- Freud gave us insight/demonstration that the ordinary person is a shrivelled desiccated fragment of what a person can be (RDLaing)
- For man has closed himself up, 'till he sees all things thro' the chinks of his cavern (WilliamBlake)
- The 'I' that I think I am is a self image formed in the mind. I am not what I think I am. So what am I? That is THE question!
- When a thought is born you are born. You think there's 'somebody' who feels your feelings; that's the illusion. (UGKrishnamurti)
- Nothing keeps you from liberation except fear. You are afraid of being impersonal, of impersonal being. (Nisargadatta)
- That which is the subtle essence, in it is the self of all that exists. It is the True. It is the Self & thou art it. (Chandogya Upanishad)
- Imagine ur a sentient being within a VR, it would seem physical, you would seem separate, yet the true agent behind every action is the CPU.
- In this VR scenario computation "is the self of all that exists. It is the True. It is the Self & thou art it. (Chandogya Upanishad)
- RT @petervan Virtual Reality you can reach out and touch http://bit.ly/cJS08I When virtual reality feels real http://bit.ly/dtTvxA
- In tech VR we look from the outside in but in cosmic VR we are emergent from the information process, which animates every thought/action.
- Quantum Mechanics also provides an information theoretic analogy for the nature of reality
- The "physical universe" is analogous to a VR animated by "universal consciousness" and it evolves as a unified holistic process.
- Hence - events happen, deeds are done but there is no individual doer of any deed (Buddha)
- The objects we experience are objects-of-perception; the contents of awareness that are imagined to exist "out there" due to naive realism
- Hence - "with our thoughts we make the world" (Buddha)
- Signs of an emerging paradigmShift http://bit.ly/dfxL4R : quantum mechanics categorically proves naive realism is a false perspective.
- For details of QM disproof of naive realism search for "Stern Gerlach" http://bit.ly/cCOjTx or see relevant chapter of http://bit.ly/9XhElB
<< Newer entries Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 279 Older entries >>
These are news items gathered or contributed by NCN members
Altered States (32)
Alternative Money Systems (17)
Broadcasting, Media (20)
Children, Parenting (28)
Counseling, Psychology (23)
Crime, Policing (7)
Death & Dying (14)
Developing World (19)
Economics, Financing, Banking (51)
Energy Sources (19)
Entrepreneurs, Money Making (19)
Environment, Ecology (123)
Exercise, Fitness (1)
Government, Public Sector (46)
History, Ancient World (38)
Housing, Building, Architecture (10)
Ideas, Creativity (318)
Investigation, Intelligence (23)
Knowledge Management (21)
Legal, Justice (24)
Liberty, Sovereignty (14)
Medicine, Healthcare (46)
Natural Health & Healing (27)
Nutrition, Cooking (7)
Old Age, Retirement (4)
Organizational Development (12)
Performing Arts (9)
Personal Development (80)
Preparedness, Self-Reliance (12)
Privacy, Security (1)
Recreation, Fun (59)
Shared Purpose (30)
Social System Design (47)
Space Exploration (23)
Systems Thinking (31)
Violence, War (103)
Visual Arts, Graphics (63)
Members can post news items and comments in the member area.
Information and opinions are the responsibility of the posters and do not represent any official position of NCN. Please do your own verification and make up your own mind.