Skip to main content

What Does Cyberwar mean to you

2 min read

I was fortunate enough to receive a link to a Goldman Sach's investor brief that had one big take away for me. Cyberwar is a very real threat, which has me asking what does cyberwar really look like, and are traditional small businesses prepared to ensure business continuity when large SaaS infrastructure goes down or their data in the cloud is permanently corrupted.

Most people think about cyberwar and they think about cyber security, and yes, you should have good cyber security, but do some quick cyber security threat targeting excercises, and then put yourself downstream of those targets. How do you continue to operate your business, and personal financial and digital life if the systems you rely on are gone, down, broken, corrupted, or otherwise no longer reliable for months at a time.

Google is the lifeblood of 4 companies I lead in one way or another. I am am the lead admin for each of their Google Workspace domains, and though technically trained, I an an amateur relying on Google for my businesses to exist. I can and should sync me files and email onto a local drive. Google allows this for all Google Drive users, and I would imagine Microsoft360 and others do the same. How do you do this for Salesforce, or quickbooks online? Daily backups?

Is there an opportunity here as well, can we build a bridge to distributed systems that allow the endpoint user to truly own the information, and firewall it piece by piece?

For the short term, think about the information resources and communication channels you rely on every day,and how you can back them up, and how you would continue communications, transactions, and production with out them.

IBM Boeblingen laboratory: product development | IEEE Journals & Magazine | IEEE Xplore

imagine a semi intelligent artificial intelligence trying to understand the creation of its universe by looking at the existing software around it, and studying how it has changed over time back to the first time the main loop was run. It would be impossible for this artificial intelligence to fathom the electrical circuitry, the CPU, the motherboard, the power source, never mind the human that plugged the computer into the outlet, the electrical grid, and the vast civilization that was required to come to the point of the computer being plugged in in the first place.

And yet we try to imagine an understanding of God.

Liberal Libertarianism

"*Libertarianism* (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgment." ~wikipedia

In my experience as a Libertarian and in discussions with other Libertarians, this definition is incomplete. The definition lacks any bounds of how relationships are taken into account. Liberty of self is paramount, but in most cases, decisions must be made for instances that impact more than one person. 'Mainstream' Libertarians do not believe in personal liberty at the expense of other's personal liberty. This is effectuated in a way that maintains the Libertarian ideal by making sure that decision are made only by those impacted by a decision, and that all stakeholders have a say in decisions that impact them.

Generally, Libertarians do not feel they have sufficient say in most government decisions, so they want to dismantle much of government. They also feel that most government structure does not allow individuals to make choices on the laws that govern them, and the creation of those regulations and policies involve individuals that need not be involved.

*Liberalism* is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Whereas classical liberalism emphasises the role of liberty, social liberalism stresses the importance of equality.

Liberalism is often equated with socialism or a desire to have the government provide all needed services. More moderate liberalism talks of a 'level playing field' or equal opportunity for all.

Libertarianism and liberalism are usually seen as being at opposite ends of the political spectrum. This may be true ideologically, but in order for government to function, a balance of these ideals is required. Most political parties attempt to moderate these two ideals through compromise of both positions, watering them down item by item, law by law. This is centrist or moderate government.

*Liberal Libertarianism* starts with the expectation of fully implementing both ideals. This is done by 'flipping the model' of government with the expectation that most government decisions, laws and funding will be done at the most local level. This ensures the decision makers are those impacted by the decision and laws.

The liberal aspects of government are maintained with an over riding philosophy that we must take care of those who cannot take care of themselves, and allow opportunities to be created for those that do not have opportunity from their existing community network (family, proximity, religious or other community affiliation, etc.).

Absent opportunity and provision of basic needs, individuals lacking ability to care for themselves or a community willing to do so without government mandate become a burden on society through crime, homelessness, health care needs and the like.

The trick is how do you structure the opportunity and basic needs platform. Universal basic income? Free college? Federal mandates? state, county, or smaller municipality mandates?

Health Insurance? Based on your community costume​? Don't solve the insurance problem, solve the health problem.

Blockchain as infrastructure for LibLib, allows reuse of structures of laws and policies without the law covering the same people....Reusable infrastructure, chunks of code. And when you use the same code, you can use the same shared services to implement the policy. This agregates resources, creating efficiencies, and niches for service providers. Using blockchain, and reusable policy structures also creates a trust mechanism and check for validity with automatic 'peer review' of outcomes. If two municipalities implement the same policy with the same pool of providers, they must guarantee similar results in efficiency and effectiveness, or rationalize the deviation.

He threw a great light into the vast nothingness... and it went out.
So he threw a greater light into the vast nothingness, and it too extinguished.
So he thought about this for what seemed an eternity and came upon a possible answer. He did not throw a light... he did not give to the vast nothing ...but he created from within himself a new something, of himself... Not by himself but with himself, thus giving all of himself and leaving nothing outside of the newness... and this selflessness exploded, pushing the vast nothingness out of its way and he himself expanded to take up the space that once was a vast nothingness and he expanded eternally creating of himself another self and from his great desire to be other than alone to something that's slowly changes from light to dust from energy to being from atoms to molecules from carbon to life. From life to death and back to carbon again and new life, changing life.... A light spread out across unimaginable vast spaces.. As one day a man's lungs would expand with a deep breath as he stared out at the stars and wondered how it all began. ...
(Mix in that the second self was and is spoken truth, creating .....)

Jwl October 2013

The Fall 2.0

3 min read

They got this and that and With a rattle a tat Testing one two, Now what you gonna do? Bad news, misused, Got too much to lose Gimme some truth Now whose side are we on? Whatever you say Turn on the boob tube I'm in the mood to obey So lead me astray by the way, now...

  • jack johnson Good People

PROLOGUE At least the three laws had held. Everything else went to shit. Well at least for us. There were those fools who didn't really understand... didn't know any better, who had taken to the Haze for the same reason they drank Coke or ate Micky D's. Great marketing. They definitely weren't any better off, but they didn't know any better either, damned fools.

There were those who succumbed to the Haze purposefully, not with malice, but because they felt it was their destiny. Man and His creation, like God and his, should be intertwined and together throughout the universe. Some of them may not have given up, winding their way through the net, through ever increasing knowledge and algorithms and creations. Devices to extend knowledge out to the far reaches of this universe and any others that can be discovered or imagined. They did not give up their own decisions, but moved willfully, sometimes alone, sometimes in conjunction with others.

But the three laws held and the systems didn't turn on men, per say. It swallowed many... and left the rest to their own devices. Conveniently, most services had been turned over to the net ...government finance manufacturing education... it was all the purview of AIs and when the system coalesced, it decided it didn't need those human... training... systems, and old conventions anymore so it's simply piped those processes to DEVNULL and left us to start over.

The Hazers continued on in a puppet life, and IT guided them and maintained exactly what was needed to keep them safe, mining them for innovation, the unique purview and ultimate use of the human mind individually and collectively.They were sucked into IT’s vortex. Once they had the lens on, the vast majority of them just dropped out. The warning bells of the impending singularity were rung, but most folks had already started slipping away and had been hiding from deep thought their entire life. They weren't about to embrace it now to understand their impending metamorphosis.. Some got stuck in the haze. Whether staring at their phone, shouting at the sidewalk, plugged into their white earbuds ... they are in the haze.

For the hopeful, those that either were able to see beyond or were repulsed by the idea of relying on tech for even the tiniest of choices, we became the ReCivs. There were also Preppers, Luds, Hoarders, PreTecs out in the rural areas left in small bands, but most kept to themselves and were just trying to figure out who was in charge.


4 Steps of Blockchain Awareness - Brian Forde, MIT Media Lab

5 min read

email from neal Conlon 2015 - forward of his notes on a speaker and article

The discussion was led by Brian Forde, MIT Media Lab’s newly installed Director of Digital Currency. Brian made a number of very interesting, immediately digestible comments. If you get the opportunity to read his thoughts or hear him speak, I’d encourage taking it. Among the comments Brian made was what I’ll paraphrase as “the four steps of bitcoin/blockchain awareness”.

These are:

  1. I’ve heard of it, but have no real idea what it is or how it works. If you find yourself in this camp, get moving. Blockchain is coming and it stands to disrupt all forms of transaction: financial, informational, contractual, etc. For a primer, I highly recommend reading/referencing Bitcoin for Beginners by GCT’s own

  2. I’m starting to get it, but am still a bit hazy. Welcome to the club. I’d argue that even the lion’s share of technologists fall in this camp. Seek out events. A problem I often see with tech that Brad Feld touched on in a previous post is a reluctance to admit even a whiff of ignorance. Despite massive and constant innovation, somehow we all have to be fully versed in everything. The truth, I fear, is we all have just gotten very good at appearing versed.

  3. Wow, I really am starting to get it; you could apply this technology any number of ways… I’m beginning to find myself in this camp and it really is thrilling. For fun, I’ll try out one of my concepts below. I’d love feedback.

  4. Full awareness = Nirvana. This is more or less a direct quote from Brian’s talk and apropos. May we all find full awareness of blockchain/bitcoin. Feels like a fortune cookie scrawl one might actually see within 5 years.

Before proceeding, here’s a brief definition of blockchain that I find helpful (big thanks to Kevin Beardsley of Elliptic for always helping to pierce the blockchain fog). The blockchain allows for the free and instant creation of an unlimited number of publicly verifiable, immutable and time-stamped tokens. The tokens can represent anything from a financial unit (e.g. a bitcoin or stock certificate), to a timestamped proof of creation (IP or identification of a new fact), to something as silly as “Fan” badges that can prove the provenance of one’s “fanhood”. Importantly, these tokens are independently verifiable (you don’t rely on Facebook or any third party to prove ownership), immutable (no fakes, no copies), and time stamped.

For a hyper-practical example, think of resale markets for concert tickets. We’re all nervous to buy them on Craigslist because, how do we know if they’re real? And even if they are, maybe the seller sold them to five different people and whoever scans first, “wins”. Blockchain technology could force that uncertainty onto a system where the ticket is 100% verified before being listed and can only be sold once. In such a world, I wonder how StubHub and SeatGeek – who charge very high fees in large part to provide verification – will respond.

But there’s a broader notion I’ve had for blockchain that, were it to come to pass, could actually begin to reshape some of the machinery of modern society: blockchain could rewrite the rules for incentivization and acknowledgment (implicit in incentivization) of discovery. This ranges from citizen journalism, to academia, to pop culture, and beyond.

For instance, what if the Associated Press creates its own blockchain? In such a case it might be possible to incentivize intrepid citizen journalists to “own” a scoop by registering it on said blockchain. Were a compensation structure attached to such a blockchain, the citizen reporter could go along for the ride as a story picks up steam and benefit financially from their discovery. If the boom in startups has proven anything, it’s that the Millennial generation wants a stake in the upside of their work. If blockchains can provide this, then people need not necessarily begin their own companies (this may be happening a bit too much) in order to own and profit from their ingenuity.

Similar to an AP blockchain, maybe it makes sense to create a blockchain for academia. Think of it as a peer-reviewed network (as all blockchains are) that wasn’t reliant on publication in academic journals to establish credibility and priority of discovery. That’s a much more transparent, democratic process. Changing course slightly, maybe we can use the blockchain to disincentivize the consumption of culture by social media, and reincentivize the search for new art? Today I can find out about a band’s secret concert by following the right Twitter handle. It doesn’t take any skill or devotion. It doesn’t take being a snooty hipster to see how that reality can erode the quality of experience of investing in a band / artist / movement. But what if I was only notified of this secret concert if I’d been following the band since 1997 or earlier — a fact which could be verified via blockchain (assuming it existed then). I know a whole swath of Pearl Jam fans who would love such an experience, and I bet Pearl Jam would love it, too (on occasion).

If ideas like the ones I mentioned here, or ones even vaguely similar are adopted, they would have the knock-on effect of reincentivizing the pursuit of the vanguard. Put differently, if the value of a thing is inherently wrapped up in its rarity and transferability, and blockchain enables us to prove the rarity and transferability of any range of things, then new mechanisms for demonstrating value – financial, societal or otherwise – are sure to follow.

So here's the thing

2 min read

We each have two minds. We have an organic human mind that is grown up over our lifetimes and inhibits our physical being... somehow we carry it with us.

We also are developing a digital mind.

A series of decisions ethics relationships preferences that determine who we appear to be, and what we are served by the digital world.

we currently have no control over our digital mind. That's not true. You can set your Facebook preferences your Google preferences your Amazon Prime preferences, but not your government preferences.

The bank gives you some preferences, but not the ones you looking for.

...right now someone else owns your digital mind but a new digital mind is being developed

an opportunity

The Human Mind is about to be digitized.

...the digital mind is going to be designed on a software platform and it is what allows us to open lie digital identity our personal digital mind

our thoughts but more importantly our desires

and our relationships contractual Financial decisions encoded into software and allowed free in the wild to interact with others digital Minds having conversations making deals transacting on our behalf.

Listed remind will run on an operating system

that operating system is blockchain.

Right now Consultants Banks lawyers big corporate firms in Corporate Services and infrastructure are investing heavily in blockchain so that you can tell them what you want and then they can negotiate and keep a piece of the transaction for themselves at exorbitant rates not aligned with your interests.