Ali of SpaceApps

Preamble

Willow: Yeah, it’s amazing.

Ali Llewellyn: That’s awesome.

Willow: I’m totally spoiled here Ali. Everybody’s so free with their time, it’s nuts.

Ali: And they appreciate you properly.

Willow: I feel appreciated, yes. I also feel challenged an awful lot of the time.

Ali: That’s awesome.

Willow: It is. It is.

Ali: To be given an opportunity where that [inaudible 00:33] is really valuable.

Willow: Yeah. Absolutely. How is the new gig?

Ali: It’s good. It’s a lot of change. I’m glad I have Nick with me. As you know, I really love all of those guys. It’s the big shift, going from being government to being an external consultant . I don’t think I had worked with enough consultants to really realize what the consulting world was like.

Willow: It’s very different.

Ali: [laughs] I think that, for me, is the complication. The people are great. It’s hard when you’re in a position that you have to go pitch for all your work, but that’s the real world.

Willow: That’s why it’s nice to be in consulting, being a consultant for the government, because it’s often pretty steady work, but you also get to be outside of that system.

Ali: Exactly. All in all, it’s good. It’s a shift. We just had team retreat where everybody was in Colorado, and we tried not to get drowned in the floods. Did you hear the story? We got up there in the middle of the afternoon.

Willow: I didn’t know that.

Ali: We did. I was typing with Lindsey because Lindsey was doing such a great job on the docs from a digital humanitarian perspective. I was like Lindsay, we’re here. If I can talk to anybody for you, let me know.

Willow: Very cool. I bet that was very cool.

Ali: Yeah. Anyway, that’s my story.

Willow: I want to do this thing with you. I need to make sure that I sent you paperwork, which is this thing. Apparently when you’re in academia, you have to send people consent forms. [laughs]

Ali: Awesome. Is it something I’m going to have to print and scan?

Willow: You can also just do a digital signature on it, and it will be fine. Cool.

Ali: You are my BFF.

[laughter]

Ali: That wasn’t [indecipherable 02:55] . Hearts from the future. Yes.

[laughter]

Ali: I was afraid you were going to say to fax it, and I was going to cry. [laughs]

Willow: Uh-huh. I don’t even know if there is a fax machine in the Media Lab. [laughs]

Ali: Yeah, good. That’s a wonderful thing. All right. Where do I sign this thing?

Willow: Just anywhere on the last page, and you can do it after we talk. That’s totally fine.

Ali: Oh. I’m like, “I’ll sign whatever you want, Willow, no worry,” because I don’t even [laughs] have to read it.

Willow: Read it also. Some of the main points are if you are OK with this being recorded, one. Two, if you want those recordings to be for just the research or if it’s OK to publish that as well. Anything that does get published, the either notes and/or the write-up will be run by all of the participants first to make sure that they’re presented in a way that they want to be presented in.

Ali: Sure. I am fine with it all being published. I want it for exactly that reason, especially since much of the work that I would probably talk to you about, I did in the government. So I’d want to be sure that I was confident that I spoke in ways that are government-ally acceptable. [laughs]

Willow: Then let’s dive into this, and I’m going to type while you talk.

Ali: Is my sound quality OK? Because I’m outside.

Willow: Yeah, it’s fine. Then if there’s a pause between when you finish speaking and I ask the next question, it’s because I almost can do transcription in real time. But I usually have about a 30-second delay.

Ali: No worries.

Willow: So that’s why I’m zoned out and still typing on things.

Ali: Wow! I feel a little intimidated by this. This is like big time here, Willow.

Willow: [laughs]

Ali: I mean for crying out loud.

Willow: Well, you know. No, it’s not.

Ali: I wanted some Muppet flail. Yay!

Willow: Does that help? [laughs]

Ali: That made me feel so much better.

Willow: Good. I’m glad. Let’s start off with who are you, and what sorts of things are you into, both hackathons and otherwise?

Interview

Ali: Sure. My name is Ali Llewellyn. I currently work at SecondMuse as a consultant for mass collaboration. Previous to my time at SecondMuse, I worked at NASA in the open innovation program, where we focused on open government, digital strategy, and mass collaboration.

I’ve really carried over my interest in those three items with me to SecondMuse. My real interest is finding effective ways to engage people in public/private partnerships and engage citizens in mass collaboration activities that allow everybody to participate in their government, improve their community, and make a better world. I do work that’s all within that scope, and it’s awesome, [laughs] actually.

Willow: What do you think about hackathons?

Ali: I love hackathons, but I hate the word. I find that when people say hackathon, they tend to mean, “Oh, a bunch of coders sitting in a room, eating pizza, not taking a shower, building geeky things.” When you say hackathons to me, I go immediately to a community of people who figure out how to solve problems. I don’t see it as an event thing. I see it as almost a lifestyle. It’s definitely a community.

In terms of what do I think about hackathons, I think it’s a way that we can harness the collective genius of people all over the world that we really need, and that when you go and immerse yourself in the middle of that environment, it’s amazing, and it’s super encouraging to hear what people have to share and the contributions that they have to make.

Willow: [laughs] How many would you say you’ve attended and what has your goal been at different ones?

Ali: I have attended probably five hackathons, mostly as part of Random Hacks of Kindness. My role in there was, initially, as a government lead in the project. I was attending to see what people were doing with my agency’s data, share the true needs behind my agency’s problems, and help encourage people and share the information they needed to work on that body of work.

Subsequent to that, I got involved in the International Space Apps Challenge, and there have been two, so I’ve attended two. [laughs] My role in that was as the challenge manager and the project manager. Unfortunately, I have never attended a hackathon simply to hack.

I hope Willow will invite me one day, but it’s been really fun to attend it from a side of helping people find the right challenges, find the right data, and make those connections to ensure that their work is used as much as it possibly can be.

Willow: Sidebar. Let’s not forget that. It’s really hard for me to focus on the interview and not be like, “We can build things!” [laughs] You sort of already answered this, but hopefully you’ll add some clarity to it. Do you think of the events you hold as hackathons, and what do you think makes them what they are, whether that’s a hackathon or not?

Ali: Sorry, say that question again. It was unclear to me.

Willow: Do you think of the events that you hold as hackathons? The Space Apps challenge is called an apps challenge. Do you still think of it as being a hackathon?

Ali: Sorry, you’re going out. The Space Apps challenge is called an apps challenge. Do I consider it a hackathon or a differences between those two?

Willow: Yeah.

Ali: No. I consider them totally equivalent. I know that there’s technically a difference between an apps challenge and a hackathon. We wanted to call the International Space Apps Challenge a hackathon, and we were straight up overruled, but we talk about it as a hackathon.

The first year, we called it a codeathon because the government perspective was we could not endorse hackathons. By the second year, we were really excited to see the government start to understand what we meant when we talked about hackathons. They accepted that while we couldn’t put it in the name, that we could talk about it as a hackathon. I use the terms interchangeably, in this context.

Willow: [laughs] You already spoke a little bit about you think the purpose of a hackathon is, but can you tell me a little bit more about that?

Ali: Sure. We talk at NASA about Apollo 13 as the first space hackathon. It was the first space hackathon because people remember the story in Apollo 13 where they dumped out the tools they had on the table, they said we have to get this to fit into this only using this. They had a limited amount of time and a limited amount of resources.

When we talk about hackathons, we talk about solving a problem with the people you have in a room, the smartest people you can find, with a limited amount of time and a limited amount of resources. We try to see hackathons in that light, of, “Here’s what we have, here’s what we need. How can you help us get there?” For us, the key about hackathons in this sense, is doing it collaboratively.

While it’s usually developers, we have really tried to push the model as hackathons aren’t just software developers. Hackathons are makers and entrepreneurs and teachers and artists. Anybody who wants to come and add their perspective and their experience to the problem that needs to be solved.

Willow: What do the projects look like for your event?

Ali: I’m going to limit my talking about Space Apps. Is that acceptable?

Willow: Totally.

Ali: Great. The projects for our events fall in four primary categories. We have software projects, obviously. We have hardware projects that often include Arduinos, 3D printers, anything that you’re building actual hardware. We have data visualization projects, which interestingly enough, tend to be the most popular projects in terms of what people like to work on.

Then we have citizen science efforts, which is usually building a platform that people can use to crowdsource science efforts. Our projects will fall in any of those categories. I’d actually add a fifth category, is that we have a number of projects where we just put a massive dataset out there and say, “Do something awesome with it.” We love to see what happens. I’m going to go down a little path here.

In the traditional government model, you procure work by you write up a statement of what you want to see. You say, “Build me an X that does A, B, and C by this date with this much money.” Part of our vision for how we use hackathons within a government agency is really to say, “Hey government, you don’t always know what’s possible with this data or even what the most awesome thing that could eventually get built is.”

As part of changing the culture of how people use, build, and perceive technology, we’re really trying to push challenges and problem statements that say, “Here’s some data. Apply your brain power to it, and just create something new,” and really trying to seed those things back into the agency with a new perspective. Those are my favorite kinds of projects.

Willow: That’s awesome, yay! What has happened to the projects from the events you’ve been to?

Ali: What has happened to the projects?

Willow: Mm-hmm.

Ali: In terms of post-event?

Willow: Yeah.

Ali: Post-event, the initial part of the process is obviously judging. We go through all the projects. We review them. We take them back to the subject matter experts that initially wrote them, all through the agencies, and talk to them about which solutions they like, why they like them, and what it would take to make those solutions usable and implementable in an agency context.

This is a place yet that we haven’t had the time or the funding to pay as much attention as we’d like to. Basically, what happens is we take those solutions back to the lead. We review them, we make the connection with the team and help build that communication process to say if you could do these things, we could implement your project.

Last time we looked, and I’ll go look up the exact number for you, I think we were thinking we were sitting at about 70 percent of the winning Space Apps projects. So, anything that went to global judging had some impact on the agency. Either it was directly used, it changed the thought space, it was used for education outreach. About 70 percent, I believe, and I’ll double check that, is the number that we were looking at.

Willow: That’s amazing.

Ali: Not nearly enough. We really see it as wanting to fine tune those things more, but it is a beginning.

Willow: Do you think a lot of that has to do with the heavy curation and maintenance, the heavy lifting, that goes on from your end?

Ali: I think it has to do one, with funding. Not enough funding, not enough people, not enough time. Secondly, in NASA, there’s a real, “Nobody who’s a hacker could have anything to say to us about space exploration.” As we bring back awesome projects, we’re helping to change that attitude, where people say, “Well, I can’t use this. Like the only people who could ever have a meaningful commentary on this data are special scientists, all of whom work for us.”

As part of that process of changing that mindset, we’re still just having to show people new ideas again and again and again and again and say, “Do you see the possibilities yet?” It’s definitely making a difference, but we’re not there.

Willow: That’s amazing. I did not understand that.

Ali: Yes.

Willow: What do you think the attendees get out of the event?

Ali: Oh, you’re going to open this little Pandora’s Box, aren’t you? What I love about Space Apps is this. I fully believe that, for sure every nerd kid, but I would argue every single kid, grew up wanting to be an astronaut, wanting to go to space, wanting to visit NASA. I think that all of us at some point thought rockets were awesome and robots are even better.

I think that people, when we invite them to participate in this work, this is saying to them, “You can still have that connection. You are still an explorer, you can still be part of how we explore space. You may not have been an astronaut but whatever you’ve done in your life that’s part of the global body of human knowledge that we need. That’s part of what makes us explorers.”

I think that, number one, what people get out of it is that. They get direct participation in the mission of pioneering the future. Other people have said to us, “Well that’s great, NASA, but what about other agencies?” I fully believe that everybody needs to participate in making their community better. It’s why the National Day of Hacking was so successful, it’s why Random Hacks are so successful.

All these efforts to say, “You don’t just need to observe the problems, you get to be a part of changing them.” I think that’s the number one thing people have gotten out of the event. We have had a number of people who make job connections, who share their resume. We’ve had a team that got into a start-up incubator or two. We’ve had a number of teams go on and build companies together.

All of that is true, but the thing that makes me passionate about Space Apps is that everyone is an explorer and that’s not a shallow tagline that we put on a sticker and plaster all over the place. It’s something real and true and meaningful that I think everybody needs and will re-inspire our nation about space, but about citizenship. How beautiful is that?

Willow: I heart you.

[laughter]

Willow: I’m so glad these don’t have to be formal interviews because I can’t quite go on. You’re wonderful. I heart your heart.

Ali: You’re wonderful.

Willow: Tell me your favorite story from an event.

Ali: My favorite story from an event. I have so many, Willow. I think that probably my favorite story this year is that the first year of Space Apps, I went to Jakarta, Indonesia and participated at the event held at the embassy there. It wasn’t only their first Hackathon, it was their first internally-held tech event ever. We had new staff, we had people who were very unfamiliar with the space and they jumped in, they did great, and I was super proud of them.

My favorite story becomes this year. I went to the event in Singapore and I got on a video chat between Singapore, Jakarta, Indonesia, Antarctica, and I believe the fourth group was in Australia. I watched this team that we had started in Jakarta just blossom. They didn’t only run an amazing event, they ran side events that they were monitoring over video in the villages so that people in the villages could directly participate.

Then they bused those teams in for an award ceremony. They coordinated everything. They got the vision. I think my real favorite story comes from teams like that that we watched step uncertainly into the space, because of the NASA name and that sounded good in terms of a PR story, but then they saw the value.

Not in whatever branding we put on it, but they saw the value in what the community was doing and then they reached out and they’re connecting with everyone and making it happen and taking it way further than I could ever take it from NASA. Taking it way further than we had even asked of them.

Just sitting on that call with them, watching them talk to Antarctica, to the South Pole, watching them lead and listen, I think was probably, this year, one of my proudest moments. That’s probably my number one. The other story I will tell had to do with a team that was in the Dominican Republic this year. It was in, I believe, Azua de Compostela.

We were working with this team in the Dominican Republic that really wanted to participate and we realized, going weeks into the event, that they had very low registration on the website. I kept reaching out to the leads trying to say, “What’s going on, what do you need, how is this happening?” We realized they had almost no personal Internet access available in this community.

Then I start to be worried of how can they participate, how can they collaborate, what can they do together? This group ended up saying we perceive ourselves as hackers and problem-solvers and we don’t need the Internet or computers to make that possible. We’re going to make bracelets, we’re going to build models, we’re going to do all these things to communicate within our community how we can be part of what’s happening there.

I had another team of high school kids in Haiti who had the second Hackathon ever in Haiti, who were reaching out by phone to this team in the Dominican Republic trying to connect with them because they realized they couldn’t do it online but they found other ways to build connections and relationships. Everybody wanted to be a part of shaping how we explored space.

I think that was probably my other proudest story of seeing these people find ways on their own, not led by us at NASA but saying, “We want to be a part of this and if we don’t have the Internet we’re still going to be a part of this and we’re going to make it awesome.” That team in the DR really inspired me.

Willow: That’s amazing.

Ali: Yes, seriously.

Interlude

Willow: It’s good. Do you want to pause for a second while you do that? Go for it.

Ali: I’m just going to go inside so I can plug in. It’s louder inside but there’s electricity.

Willow: OK. We only have two questions left.

Ali: Perfect. Say hi.

Nick: Hi, Willow.

Willow: Hi, how’s it going?

Nick: Good to see you.

Willow: Good to see you, too.

[crosstalk]

Ali: Is the noise really bad in here or is it OK?

Willow: No, it’s OK. It’s alright.

Ali: I will sit right here and we will continue. Go for it.

[TV playing in background]

Interview

Willow: Next question is do you see yourself as part of a wider movement?

Ali: [pause] Oh my goodness. Do I see myself as part of a wider movement? Yes, necessarily. I, as a person from a non-technical background, when I came to go to my first hackathon, my mind kept saying, “I’m not a hacker, I don’t have a role here, I’ll just go and be an observer. ”

My first hackathon in Philly when I met people who said, “No, no, no, we need your skills and your attributes and your experiences to make this awesome,” opened up this whole vision for me that hacking was about all of us. It wasn’t about who could develop, it wasn’t about who were the subject matter experts. It was about us all figuring out together what the problem space looked like and then us all doing our part to move the whole Earth into a better place.

Yes, I definitely see the wider movement of people who are passionate about being a part of making the world better, for sure. Like Willow, who inspires me.

Willow: I’m not going to quote that, but thank you. [laughs] I’ll type it. I have to type the whole thing later, anyway. Do you think that that wider movement is accomplishing that goal of making things better?

Ali: All I got was accomplishing. I hope you can hear me better than I can hear you. I definitely think that the wider movement is accomplishing these things. Nothing makes me angrier than people who are like, “The hackathon movement is burned out, nobody wants to hack anymore, and it’s just stupid, people are just building things that don’t go anywhere. It’s like a two-day love fest with pizza.”

Those things are certainly true in certain spaces. There are events that are run like that and there are people who are feeding, I think, that incorrect public perception. I fully believe that the wider movement is accomplishing these things. One example of where I get really inspired about this is my friend Willow runs this thing called the Digital Humanitarian Group.

I have never been so inspired in what’s possible in the hacking world as I sat on the phone with these people all over the world who are saying, “We specialize in disaster and we specialize in government and we specialize in education and here’s what we’re doing, what are you doing and how can we do those things together?”

Every time I walk through this movement of people who are full of generosity of spirit and who say, “We’re in this to support each other, not to build kingdoms or claim territories, not to say look what I built, but really to say this is why we can be part of the solution and not be part of the problem.” I try to hold out numerous examples of this because it really offends me when I hear people blow off hackathons.

“We don’t want to do a hackathon, that doesn’t accomplish anything.” It doesn’t accomplish anything if that’s how short-sighted your vision is. If you have a vision to say a hackathon isn’t an event, a hackathon is a community of people and it’s the people who shepherd solutions forward because they’re committed to them, not just because they’re a PR stunt. Those are the kind of ways that we’re going to change the world together. How was that?

Willow: You’re great. You’re so eloquent and excited and inspiring.

Ali: It’s my friends at Geeks Without Bounds who taught me everything I know.

Willow: Oh, shucks. You taught us, too.

Ali: Seriously. My first hackathon was that RHoK I went to in Philly and it was Mike Brennan’s first hackathon. It just cracks me up when they did Philly SNAP. It just cracks me up to look back at that and think of how new so many of us are to this process but how committed we are to helping shepherd it forward. It’s all because I have the GWOB coin of power. Oh yeah.

Willow: Those things are so great.

Ali: I’ll say this, too, I’m just telling you, it doesn’t have to be official. You would be super inspired, Willow. We had this event last week at JPL called Launch. Launch is NASA and Nike and State and USAID and it’s collaboratively resourcing technology innovations and shepherding them forward. Here’s why I believe in hackathons.

We did one on water innovations. We did health and energy and waste and all these things. This one was about materials science. They had this amazing woman named Suzanne Lee from the UK who basically has this company called BioCouture, who had figured out how to use a tub full of enzymes to grow clothes. She’s awesome.

Everybody was doing these amazing projects and pitching them, and Suzanne gets up on the stage and basically turns around and says, “Look, these innovations are amazing.” She got invited to be a TED fellow based on this awesome innovation that she built.

She said, “But I don’t want to do that. What I want to do is draw the community together so that we’re not innovating separately. We’re innovating collaboratively. I want to help resource and network an open source movement of makers who are going to use materials as a way to solve problems. I know it’s happening in a one-off way, but nobody is stepping out and creating a space where we could solve problems based on our communal skills.”

I’m crying listening to her. The fact that she sees why that’s important and is willing to lay down that technology innovation to help lead a community into that, that’s why I believe in the hackathon movement. It’s people who have that vision and that clarity to say, “This is why it’s important not only that we innovate, but that we innovate cooperatively, collaboratively, and as a community, and that that’s the only way we’re going to actually change an industry.”

She inspired me. You would have loved it.

Willow: [laughs] That is awesome. Thank you.

Ali: Yay!

Willow: Yay! Do you have anything else you want to…

Ali: What else can I do for you?

Willow: Just let me know if you have anything else that you’re excited about that you want to be sure you have a chance to say.

Ali: I have lots of things that I’m excited about, Willow. Yay!

[laughter]

Wrap Up

Ali: I just need to fill out that one form and email it back to you. Is there anything else you need?

Willow: Nope. That’s it.

Ali: OK.

Willow: Thanks, Ali.

Ali: Do you need me to pester my comrades, or are you going to pester them just fine?

Willow: If you want to pester them, if it’s easy for you. If not, then I’ll pester them in a couple days.

Ali: OK. Well, I will happily help pester them. [laughs]

Willow: OK. Thank you, Ali. It’s good to see you and good to talk to you.

Ali: All right, well, keep in…

Asheesh of OpenHatch

Who are you?

Asheesh of OpenHatch!

What do you think about hackathons?

Haven’t been to many things which are now called hackathons. Favorite
They took my subculture and turned it into a theme night.
Before startup enthusiasm and big money swallowed these things up…
2 to 100 people getting together around one project and calling it a hackathon or a sprint. A goal. Working together on a shared goal. Startup lens thoughts are celebrations of individual and slightly group ability to make cool looking throw away software projects that tickle some kind of curiosity that the judges have. Flashy things. No followup except to work on them privately as a group as a startup. Disheartening

How many have you attended?

What role did you fill at each of those (orga, facilitation, mentor, speaker, etc)
In 2008 I went to the Debian conference for the first time. People talking about Debian, how to improve it, and working on those improvements. Every year since them. 2012 went to DebCamp. Only people getting together to work on stuff. Before the event, must explain what it is you are working on, has to be improved. Freely shared after the fact. Another 5 times. Some programming at each of those. 2011 I hid from talks, worked in hacklab on specific tech projects. Still has other people working on it. “Participant for those”
Pycon around python language, plus the sprints after up to 5 days. March 2009. One of the first software conferences, had approval to stay from my employers. ** Peter Fein on that. Knew I’d show up and try out different things. Then learned about Open States, how legislature blows through different states.
Wikimania in 2012 I was one of the co organizers. Every technical event is a “hackathon” for them – style of EriK Mueller. Wikimania is the conference for wikipedia enthusiests, and wikimedia platfrm. The hackathon is two fold in purpose. Distributed groups, paid staff, whatever to work in some way to progress teh software around wikimedia. Automated tool to maintain things, like bots. Inreach aspect, outreach aspect. Open Hatch to co organize for more of an outreach angle. New contributor manuals. Dogmatic of “here is how you set up your computer to run Wikimedia” as opposed to the wishy washy different ways of doing things. Pure encyclopedia aspect.
I’ve lead or co-organized a bunch of “here’s how to get involved with open source” often with a specific gender angle. First one was Sept 25, 2010. How to collaborate on open source, communicate skills. Community understanding, find out about open source projects. As much teaching as doing at the hackathons. Half workshops, half hand-picked projects for attendees. Mentors to make sure people achieve those tasks.
Product nights at Boston and some other cities now. Bring a project connected to Python, create a feeling of welcoming. Envision product structure along with

What do you think the purpose of a hackathon is?

Erik Muller likes to call everything a hackathon. Two different separate goals – inreach and outreach. Hackathon is not well defined. Code sprint has a stated goal of wanting to contribute things to an existing project, fairly consistent use of the term – Debian, Python, KDE, etc. Project nights are “work on your own stuff” with the background role of collaboration and socializing iwth people who like things your like your project.
Open source comes to universities – teaching day, coding day. Not hacking. Negative connotation in many places. DebCamp is tightly defined.

What do projects look like for your event?

Hit control c when you want to stop me
DebConf 2011. In 09 and 10, two people with a bunch of experience noticed there was a lack of ability to review work from folk new to the community. Reviewing and sponsoring code. DebExpo.
Funded by Google Summer of Code, weren’t quite done with it yet,student couldn’t keep working on it. Languished. Probably 08 summer of code project. Interested in newcomer experience, especially on Debian. I was contributed to “someone else’s project” but it was for teh community of 1k plus contributors. DebConf to run well enough to replace teh thing it was supposed to repalce. Community work to get people iterested in maintaining it.
Hackathon part of it that was pivotal to my setting aside time to work on it. Seeing future collaborators. Dev Expo. mentors.debian.net Twisted project is 12 year old project for easy to write, great software makes it do things. “The Engine of Your Internet”
Run monthly-ish events for volunteers to get together and work on things, explore the design of the code. Not just organized by the founder, but in the inreach goal. Had a hugely great time fixing tiny bugs. There’s a famously crotchety guy named Jean-Paul Calderone https://github.com/exarkun
left software dev to become a farmer. Anyway. Stuggling to figure out a bug from 3 years before. Figured out the dev tools working with IRC and i person. Did all the technical stuff, had it reviewed, got put into Twisted. Tapped into my laptop doing paperwork. And his old dude turned around and said “thank you for doing that.” But with longevity, they want more people to be involved with their project

History!

My understanding is about reading a bunch of os mailing lists. 2003 or earlier. Poepole would get together and work on things. See the term bouncing around, confirmed understanding. Then 2010ish I started noticing it showing up in high-flash expensive efforts to encourage people to build exciting looking disposable things. Rolled my eyes at it. The way I interact with anything famous is.. The iPod comes out and comment on slashdot: “No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.”
Tell me your favorite story from an event.
Haven’t ranked them all. First open source comes to Penn or something. Open Source Immersion, the first event in the Open Source Comes to Campus series. Wanted to find novel ways of how to get undergrads aware of and involved with open source. Had OpenHatch. Who signed up for it? I have a secret hidden agenda in making these things more welcoming to make them much more diverse. The sign up page talked in broad strokes, we love this thing, answer these things: what do you know about open source, how you found out about htis website. Wanted to do specific outreach to women in CS. 38% percent were women in general signup. Had too many people signing up for slots. Sorted by excitement level. About 30% of that set were women. That’s my favorite from that event.
Another thing fro that event – 20/30 minutes on history, another 20/30 on Q+A. I’m a free source activist, this person was an undergrad at Penn who was new to open source. As I’m a free software activist, I cared a lot about helping the next generation understand the principles and history behind the movement. After a 20-30 minute lecture on history, followed by 20-30 minutes of Q&A with two volunteer staffers, one student came up to me. She said she was really taken by the open source ethos, but she then told me she fond the term “hack” alienating. That was especially informative to me, since the following day was dedicated to contributing to open source projects but called the “hackathon day” (you can see that here: http://penn.openhatch.org/ ).
I feel alienated by the term “hack” in the talk and in the stuff we’ll be doing tomorrow.

What is that wider movement about?

Is it accomplishing those ends?
Yes but those connections are hard to make. The Grace Hopper open source day is really interesting. There about a week ago. Two or three years ago, Deborah Nicholson and bunch of folk from Sahana (opensource disaster response) participated. Those folk come from more of a hackathon and less of an opensource community background. They found that they struggled to get developers set up with the environment in the amount of tie they had. OpenHatch isn’t flawless either, but we improve it over the years. Certaily seen hackathon like things focused on non profits and techie people can help solve it over a weekend, use open source, customize it. Things that grow the communities around the software. But if they could write about it for the projects would know about the super cool thing going on

Other Things

Things I majored/minored in. Active in the computer club. What I understood computing culture to be. People who wanted to hear more about software, ask questions, find out what other people are up to. Go on random technical adventures together. I have a thing I wanted to do, I knew if I coldn’t do it, I could find someone who could help me just by being in that office. Some of those peopel were transparently about social value. Blogging for Hopkins community. Some were flashy and throw away, like thing for Pandora.
Totally different thing that happened was I had a wacky idea in 2003. Things too seriously: alsamixer doesn’t let you know what is going on until it plays it. Set flags. Wouldn’t it be great if it played music while you changed your volume: salsamixer. Change volume but also modify the name and icon so they know which one they are using. Learned about statemachine in C. Kernel mixers with A and S. More seriously, other people had a week long project to rewrite memory thing. CS research people who hung out there, learned a bunch about tools. How memory management works. Week long hackathon. Sure learned a lot.
I a way, hackathons strike me as what would happen if people who weren’t immune to this idea of background community wanted it but didn’t know how to do it. Make temporary events to bring people together. Background community.
When you open teh GIMP, the file extension is XCF, why would it be extention? eXperimental Computing Facility. Another resource: http://coe.berkeley.edu/engnews/spring03/4S/XCF.html
Needed their own space, came up with their own stuff, including a file. Then it was a group of people . After they graduated, it spun down. The open .. movement, created a space that anyone could join even if they weren’t those people. OCF is still around. XEF left a shrine to their existence on computers in this extension. More info about XCF http://www.salon.com/2000/12/04/xcf/
Salon article, became an amateur collector of these things. What is their computer group up to? How often do they meet, what are they up to? Etc. Now I use the same thing to improve user groups.

Projects from the Boston Aaron Swartz Hackathon

Written with Erhardt GraeffSJ Klein

Intro Talk Ethan led us out by talking about the breadth of Aaron’s work, and what it is to be an “effective citizen.”

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1Pn3mm3bK6U

(Second day’s talks are written up already on the Civic blog here.)

Projects We Worked On We are deeply appreciative of all of the hard work done at the event, and about the social bonds built in our time together.

Ableson Report TL; DR Distillation and restating the Report to the President on MIT’s role (or lack thereof) in the arrest and suicide of Aaron Swartz, such that more people can join in the conversations around the issues specific to MIT.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=cJxP3jOdO-I

Finished with: Prioritized and referenced questions for the FAQ doc, this prezi (which can still be expanded upon, but this is a start), and a super pretty interface to put it all into as we work.

http://prezi.com/embed/9r2agd3u8ule/?bgcolor=ffffff&lock_to_path=0&autoplay=0&autohide_ctrls=0&features=undefined&disabled_features=undefined

Emerson Working with Mozilla’s web API structures to to wrangle control of personal data across the web back into the hands of users.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=VFjmcoWufRk%3Flist%3DUUbqhCwZfmeKwMhaXyW4tUtw

Repeal the CFAA Repeal the CFAA: The CFAA is broken; no one but prosecutors like it. Building a constructive, normative replacement, and strategies for getting support at all levels: executive, policy, law, prosecution, activists, cyberwar. Cooperating with Aaron’s Law and EFF work; but also tackling. Most discussions of “CFAA reform” have been incremental, in a framework of discussing what changes to current law are possible and would help fix recent problems; as opposed to describing why CFAA is broken and what proportionate and moral laws in that space wold look like. We’re trying to describe what effective policy would look like, starting from scratch. Policy, Legal, Social, Tech/Security, and Prosecutorial norms which make sense. Project details and analysis

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tr1g9MmOXZM

Strong Box A platform for whistleblowers to transfer documents to newspapers directly. Initial code by Aaron Swartz.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=SAGoft_e-PY

This gentleman fixed a bug in how to delete files which a journalist may no longer find relevant.

Tor2Web Set out to work on tor2web, which makes it possible for internet users to view content from Tor hidden services. It’s online in a (mostly) functioning form at http://tor2web.org. Worked on by Aaron Swartz.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=wzs-TScDqk0

Finished with: a WORKING simple anonymous editable pastebin (no public code yet; on AWS w/ sponsorship). Hot damn!

What’s Next? Keep going, of course!

Recurring Calls We’ll have an ongoing call—once a week on Mondays for November, then monthly. These are to touch base about our work, to help solve issues and celebrate successes. If you’d like to be added to the calendar, invite, please leave a comment or email Willow

Open Atrium We’ll track our progress and objectives on this open source project management platform. It’s a way for us to remain ambiently aware of each other while still being accountable. If you’d like to hop on a project, or be aware of how projects are progressing, check out atrium.aaronswartzhackathon.org

IRC As always, you can join us in the OFTC IRC room #aaronswhack

VizThink Overview

I do these live drawings while people are speaking in order to demonstrate their ideas. Orginally mentored by James Carlson, I started doing visual thinking in earnest when someone turned left in front of me, causing a shattered radius. Since, it’s become my primary method of note taking, and a wonderful way to augment written notes.

Different Things to Show

Charts!At its most basic, visual thinking is a way to show workflow and charts. Rather than explaining in lengthy and complicating words, a drawing can often demonstrate relationships and interactions between components. Charts can be serious and examinging:

Value Based Chart

Or they can be silly and humorous:

Dubstep

Individual IdeasOften, when people are speaking or beginning to flesh out an idea, it makes sense to draw the individual components or speaking points as just that – individual parts. Using Adobe Ideas on my iPad, I do one layer per point. Often, these just end up as a collection of strangely-shaped references to ideas, which can then be arranged (remember, different layers!) to look nice nested within each other. This is, I suppose, a form of graphic design. 

 If there are enough components, or enough detail, it’s worth embedding into a prezi and defining a path for the viewer. More on that later. And http://prezi.com/d6ciafhoptrq/intertwinkles/De Conflating IdeasIt also helps to de-complicate what is a part of a workflow, what isn’t, and where confusion is coming in. This is the part of the conversation or explanation where we start gesticulating or arranging things on the table to demonstrate a point. For instance, I was frustrated that a bunch of digital disaster response groups wanted to list all the other projects that were going on for a certain topic (in this case, Hurricane Sandy). This is bulky because then there are many places to update if a project changes, completes, or dies. After spending 40+ lines of text in chat trying to explain what I meant, drawing this picture helped much more.

One reason the internet is amazing is because of the ability to point sections of a webpage at other webpages (RSS FTW). Not doing that was over complicating matters, but so what trying to differentiate via text rather than in a drawing. 

Building a Story

Now that you’re able to deconflate ideas as well as delineate them, it makes sense to move on to how components of a story interact with each other. Rather than moving from node to node, this method takes layers in Adobe Ideas and stacks them on top of one another. In this way, you can start to see how ideas flow into each other, and how they interact.

http://prezi.com/zi19tv4lwypr/the-psychology-of-difference-and-the-science-of-difference/

System Interaction

Life isn’t linear, and at times it is difficult to express all the moving parts while not losing the trees for the forest. While all models are incomplete (but they can still be useful), having a drawing can acknowledge the boundaries of a systems model while not dwelling on those limitations. 

http://prezi.com/0tky5lswrnbn/fema-field-innovation-team/

Similar to storytelling and individual nodes, we still see the individual components. However, in a System Interaction drawing, we see how those components play off of each other, and see where leverage points might be.

Tools

Stylus

I use an iPad and an electrostatic sock over a chopstick from this dude: 

http://www.etsy.com/search?q=shapedad&view_type=gallery&ship_to=US

Sometimes I pick up a stylus from a store.

Adobe Ideas

Is what I draw in. It provides many useful components while not being so overwhelming as to be ungainly, nor difficult for new users.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adobe-ideas-vector-drawing/id364617858?mt=8

Graphics are vector, though the canvas isn’t quite infinite. It exports as PDF, which can be surprisingly versatile once you get ahold of them. And, it imports nicely into Prezi. It’s also available on Android, but a bit laggy.

Notability

For general note-taking, and text-heavy talks, Notability is also pretty great. It’s what I use for some IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference notes, because it nests drawings in with text in with images all in the same document. It’s not useful for the Prezi-zoom interface, but it’s much better for in-depth blog entries.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/notability/id360593530?mt=8

It also does this great thing where it will record audio and sync your notes to it. Personally super useful, especially as you become reliant upon including drawings in some way.

Prezi

Prezi is what a lot of this work goes into. It lets me guide the way people move through notes – nested ideas, eastereggs, and all. That is probably a tutorial in and of itself, but here is something about how my brain works around it: http://blog.prezi.com/latest/2013/10/4/how-a-broken-arm-and-prezi-helped-me-save-new-york.html

InterTwinkles

Yesterday held many gems, and one of my favorites was seeing Charlie defend his dissertation (he would prefer it be called “defenestration“). He’s built an incredible tool called InterTwinkles, an online tool for non-hierarchical, consensus-oriented decision making.

Non-hierarchical, participatory, consensus-based decision making has seen an explosion in popularity in recent years. The traditional techniques of formal consensus, however, are limited to face-to-face meetings, which can limit organizations’ capacity due to their time and cost. InterTwinkles is a set of integrated but composable online tools designed to assist small and medium-sized groups in engaging in formal group decision making processes online. In this thesis, Charlie DeTar presents a thorough investigation of the ethical and practical motivations for consensus decision making, and relates these to concerns of control and autonomy in the design of online systems. He describes the participatory and iterative design process for building an online platform for consensus, with particular attention to the practical constraints of real-world groups with mixed technical aptitude. He presents the results of a three month field trial with six cooperative groups in the Boston area, and evaluates the results through the lens of adaptive structuration theory, with particular attention on the fit between the ethical motivations and performance outcomes.

It also generated one of the better #vizthink outputs I think I’ve done in awhile. A big part of being able to do that is based all of the wonderful conversations Charlie and I have shared over the past few months. He’s always been generous with his time and his brains.

Keep an eye out for his future work, try out InterTwinkles in your housing co-op or other affinity-based consensus group. While I (and the rest of the Media Lab) will miss Charlie dearly, Montana calls him to new adventures (and to his awesome partner!).

Introducing the Participatory Aid Marketplace

My cohort Matt Stempeck at the Center for Civic Media at MIT’s Media Lab recently finished his graduate thesis on participatory aid. We were also on a panel together at the MIT-Knight Civic Media Conference. Here’s a blog he posted on the Civic Blog about his work – it’s reposted here with his permission.

Unlike my thesis readers, who may or may not have made it through all 244 pages, you get to experience the condensed version. The full PDF is here, if you’re into reading and citations.

Participatory Aid

People are using information and communication technologies (like the internet) to help each other in times of crisis (natural or man-made). This trend is the evolution of a concept known as “mutual aid”, introduced by Russian polymath Peter Kropotkin in 1902 in his argument that our natural sociable inclinations towards cooperation and mutual support are underserved by capitalism’s exclusive focus on the self-interested individual. My own reaction is to the bureaucracy’s underserving of informal and public-led solutions.

The practice of mutual aid has been greatly accelerated and extended by the internet’s global reach. I introduce the term “participatory aid” to describe the new reality where people all over the planet can participate in providing aid in various forms to their fellow humans. In many of these cases, that aid is mediated at least partially by technology, rather than exclusively by formal aid groups.

Formal aid groups like the UN and Red Cross are facing disintermediation not entirely unlike we’ve seen in the music, travel, and news industries. Members of the public are increasingly turning towards direct sources in crises rather than large, bureaucratic intermediaries. Information is increasingly likely to originate from people on the ground in those places rather than news companies, and there is a rich and growing number of ways to help, as well.

You are more than your bank account

The advent of broadcast media brought with it new responsibilities to empathize with people experiencing disaster all over the world. For most of the 20th century, the public was invited to demonstrate their sympathy via financial donations to formal aid organizations, who would, in turn, help those in need (think telethons). This broadcast model of aid works well for martialing large numbers of donors, IF a crisis is deemed significant enough to broadcast it to the audience. Many crises do not reach this threshold, and therefore do not receive the public or private relief support that often follows broadcast attention.

People are using the internet to help in creative ways in times of crisis. There are pros and cons to this development, to be celebrated and mitigated. Briefly, the pool of people who can help in some way is now orders of magnitude larger than it was previously, and the value of those peoples’ contributions is no longer limited to the financial value of their bank accounts. People have consistently proven capable of creative solutions and able to respond to a wider range of human needs than formal needs assessment methodologies accommodate.

On the flip side, not every way to help online is as effective as providing additional funding to professional crisis responders. There is already a graveyard of hackathon projects that never truly helped anyone (especially those with no connection or feedback loop from anyone in the field). The expansion of the range of crisis responders can lead to fragmentation of resources and duplication of efforts, although anyone managing the thousands of traditional NGOs that descended upon Haiti following the earthquake there will tell you that the same problem exists offline. It is my hope that open data standards and improved coordination between projects can mitigate some of these issues.

case-library-categories

How to Help Using Tech

One of the more celebrated methods of recent years is the practice of crisismapping. Following a disaster, crowdsourced mapping platforms like Ushahidi are populated with geocoded data by globally distributed online volunteers like Volunteer Standby Taskforce. The teams collect, translate, verify, analyze, and plot data points to improve the situational awareness (the “what’s going on where”) of formal emergency managers and organizations.

Of course, participatory aid is not limited to producing crisis maps to benefit formal aid organizations, and I argue we shouldn’t limit our understanding of the space to this one early example. Countless professions have shifted to support the digitization of labor, so many of our jobs can (and are) conducted online (pro bono networks like Taproot Foundation and Catchafire are important inspirations to consider). Over time, technology has continued to expand the range of actions an individual can accomplish from anywhere in the world.

A Case Library of New Ways to Help

To support this argument, I collected a case library of nearly one hundred ways members of the public can help communities in crisis (as well as the formal aid organizations working on behalf of these communities). I still need to convert the full case library from Word to HTML, but you can get a sense of it here.

I spent a lot of time thinking about the many ways people can help using technology, and abstracted from these many cases 9 general categories to organize the library. They are to your left.

Framework

From the many examples in the case library, I abstracted a framework to help define and think about participatory aid projects:

framework

Participatory aid can consist of projects that help existing formal aid groups (like a crisis map created at the request of such an institution) or projects that seek to help the affected population directly (like the Sandy Coworking Map, which listed donations of commercial real estate by and for the people of New York). This is a spectrum, because there are many projects which seek to help the affected population as well as the professionals mediating their aid.

Likewise, there is a spectrum between microwork, which often gets called ‘crowdsourcing’, and far less discrete tasks, like designing an entirely new software project or launching an entirely new public initiative like Occupy Sandy. In my research, I noticed that even some of those in the participatory aid space a limited view of its possibilities, and consider crowdsourced microwork at the behest of existing state actors (quadrant IV) to be the ideal application of technological innovation in crisis response. This is an exciting area, but there’s equally great work being done elsewhere. We can create and execute much deeper, more complicated solutions than helping sort thousands of tweets to extract actionable information. (See Ethan Zuckerman’s discussion of thick vs. thin engagement, which I borrow).

Participatory Aid Marketplace

Because I’m at the Media Lab, I was charged with building a piece of technology in addition to producing the written thesis. After conducting interviews with a wide range of leaders in the participatory aid space (and reading a crazy wide range of documents), it emerged that coordination of efforts was a major and unsolved need. Volunteers are interested in what they can do to help, and prefer to use their professional skills if volunteering (versus making a donation). Leaders of semi-formal volunteer organizations like those that make up the Digital Humanitarians Networkseek common check-in forms to easily alert one another (and the world) to their deployments. The individuals within formal aid organizations (like UN-OCHA) who are working to better integrate participatory aid with formal aid also stand to benefit from improved coordination and aggregation of participatory aid projects.

So, with a team of MIT undergrads (Patrick Marx, Eann Tuann, and Yi-shiuan Tung), I co-designed and built a website to aggregate participatory aid projects. The goals of the site are:

  • to index active participatory aid projects by crisis to provide an overview of public response
  • to match skilled volunteers with projects seeking their help
  • to host the case library of previous examples of peer aid, tagged by the needs they addressed, in the hopes of inspiring future projects
  • to do all of this in as user-friendly, open, and distributable ways as possible (including early support for a couple of emerging aid data standards)

Participatory Aid Marketplace
A design mockup of the functional Drupal site

The site provides administrators of participatory aid projects with a simple form to list their project. This form populates the active project views as well as the case library, and links projects to common crisis needs and general buckets of volunteer skills. It can also automatically distribute the content to existing coordination fora like Google Groups or RSS readers.

Volunteers can participate in the site with full-fledged profiles, skills<->project matching, and specific LinkedIn skills importing. The more likely use case consists of short, anonymous visits to quickly identify meaningful ways to help in the crises people care about.

The skills selection and importing prototype

The skills selection and importing prototype

Future Work

There’s a lot more in the full thesis, but essentially, we’ve worked with some of the most innovative groups in crisis response to build a functional prototype that would only require some design work and loving iterations to be of real utility. I’m looking into various ways to finish development and implement the site (not to mention identify a good organizational / network home). Get in touch with me if you’d like to talk about the platform, or this space in general.

THANKS

Thanks for reading this.

Also, while I’ve worked for years to use the web to organize people to create change in the world, my background isn’t in humanitarian aid or crisis response. My ability to rapidly understand this space and consume massive amounts of information (written and social) was directly correlated with the kindness and enthusiasm of people like Willow Brugh, Luis Capelo, Natalie Chang, all of my interview subjects, all of the kind survey respondents, and of course my readers, Ethan ZuckermanJoi Ito, and Patrick Meier. My colleagues, the staff and fellow grad students of the Center for Civic Media, shared their intellectual firepower at every turn.

Becoming Structured

Feeding off the Pixels and Paintbrushes blog entry. Interested in that transition space between the analog and the digital. It’s funny, liminal has long been my favorite word, rivaled only recently by penumbral. More and more, I get to look at and live in that space. But now I see it more as the space of transition, not just as space between/at the edge.

So this thing happens, where we have formal structures, and the informal takes up the space between. As in the previous entry, each of these has its purpose and strengths and weaknesses.

This drawing based off a conversation with Galit, a cohort and roommate.

This drawing based off a conversation with Galit, a cohort and roommate.

As a reference, let’s take the limited work I’ve done with Occupy Relief efforts. I act as human API – if you need something from a formalized organization, including them getting out of the way, let me know. Then there are posts like this one, which is totally legit. But it puts me in a strange place of saying “I stand with you politically, but if you want this taken care of logistically, then let’s do that.” Something that keeps me in the relief space is how stark a relief differences are thrown into1. The choices that have to be made, and what is considered important when, and what cultural artifacts are created by those choices. A big part of how adaptable and powerful Occupy is, is based upon their NOT being defined nor legible. More and more I wonder how to make groups like FEMA legible to Occupy, rather than the other way round.

Reading Seeing Like A State, if you can’t tell. So very good. And then, I got to see Douglas Rushkoff speak about his new book, Present Shock. I think a HUGE part of these ideas overlap.

He equated the quest for the upper right quadrant in Capitalism with the Singularity as an example of existing world views being applied to new ways of considering the future. Rushkoff also brought up the feminist media theory of storylines and plots of male vs female orgasm – one is a single escalation and then easy bell curve down. The other being complex, multi-apex, etc. The only way we’ve known for things to be predictable is with the storyline we could track – the male orgasm model2.

Now we have the ability to see, track, understand the complexity of “actual” life3 through big data4 in a way that understands as it emerges, rather than forces adherence to a predictable, and thereby incomplete, model. And instead we are applying the same two-dimensional, simplistic pattern to it, and cutting off the long tails of a bell curve we’ve forced everything into. We’re bringing the legal system of documents and MAYBE spreadsheets to a database and RDF world5. We are not allowing ourselves the nuance of the paintbrush, digitized through the use of high-density pixels. We’re making ourselves bland and bucketed instead. A low-res snapshot of culture, of which the mere act of capturing makes us fulfill it more closely. Through quantified self and things like Prism, we’re stealing our own souls, at least as things are set up now6.

And this is why I’m doing the research I am. I’m tired of us lugging our unexamined baggage into the future we’re building. In the past, institutions were where knowledge was stored. Now it’s stored in us, in a sharable and duplicatable way. Seeing Rushkoff was inspiring, because he noted that yes, it’s difficult to exist in the crevices, but it’s also totally worthwhile. Video and audio are up already on the Berkman site.

 

It’s the trying to fit new things into old methods. We have to be willing to embrace some unpredictability in order for the lives of others to be more predictable to themselves. Crowds becoming “less predictable” to an outside view, but they’re becoming more self-determining. Let go of the reins and let it guide itself. Isn’t that the point of having power? To push it outwards?
—–

1. See why penumbral is a favorite word?
2. Sidenote that I just tried to find links to the academic background on this, but guess how useful the internet is for THAT.
3. Or at least a closer approximation than we’ve had in the past.
4. Which would be the crowning, and crowing, triumph of Sociology.
5. And the database model isn’t The Best, it’s just “better” than what we’ve had before, in that it’s more self-defining and adaptable.
6. Damn kids get off my keyboard.

Oversharing as Digital towards the detail of Analog

Did you know there’s a level of Dots Per Inch after which your eye simply cannot see any difference? Any added level of detail isn’t perceptible to you unless you select an area to zoom in on, changing the inches over which the dots are distributed.

This is what came to mind when listening to the Oversharing Forum at Media In Transition 8 conference at MIT’s Media Lab. The speakers covered EverydayCarry, the panopticon, and quantitative self. The point was brought up of how you must always assume you are being surveilled, and it only takes one person in a group to be recording for the entire group to be documented. The responsibility was bandied from the person recording to the person being recorded, to the person sharing, to the spaces themselves have default settings for recording (or not) (think theaters vs conferences). Zittrain brought up that the only way to NOT be recorded is to not do anything notable, and that is a long dark path of social blandness and fragility.

If each of us is a set of pixels in an image, or we produce the pixels which make up a digital self, at some point you get high resolution by sharing more, but it’s still in the abstraction of viewing the whole picture that people get a sense of who you are. Strangely, because we are each sharing things with metadata, we are also able to get abstraction divorced from the individual, and rather across the topic (EverydayCarry being a great example of this). These pixels, if we each are keeping our heads down for fear of how we are treated in the future, lead to one bland picture when you step back from the individual into the zoom setting of society.

http://prezi.com/embed/9lu7dlnyl6vg/?bgcolor=ffffff&lock_to_path=0&autoplay=0&autohide_ctrls=0&features=undefined&disabled_features=undefined

For me, this is contingent upon two things: one is a celebration of diversity, so that image is beautiful regardless of zoom. The issue here is how we handle past mistakes, how we grow as individuals, and what it is to act for the sake of an act rather than as performance. Caveats of course apply for healthy vs antisocial deviations from the norm. Secondly, we have made explicit how individuals in aggregate form the social. The individual’s broadcast (or notable lack) has always been what has formed society, but now the ability to see and track this makes the sharing and examination itself as equally apparent as the information being shared. We must begin to detail where that line exists and the expectations and responsibilities associated with it.

Project-Based Collaborations / Collusions

In starting research with Center for Civic Media, I get to sit and read for hours a day. Go to conferences which seem interesting. Attend talks of people I’ve read the work of. It is absurd. I still don’t like the institution of academia, but that’s because everyone should have access to such resources, not because I don’t like (and appreciate) the opportunities. My research is on how organizations with distributed power scale. In this area of study, decentralization or distributed power in an group is referred to as “flat.” “Decentralized” as a stand-alone term usually means how resources are distributed, rather than power structures. Read more about that on Charlie DeTar’s great post.

This means I’ve been reading rather a lot around how activist groups change over time based on how they interact with the rest of the world, each other, and themselves. Most recently, I finished Revolutions in Reverse, a collection of David Graeber essays. A standard sequence which became clear to me is the following:

  • Individual groups work towards their objective from their perspective, build up some sort of core and maybe a following.
  • Occasionally, something massive comes up, and some of these groups band together. While they have different perspectives, they share an objective for a short period of time. Basically, alliterative alignment-based alliance.
  • After the shared objective is achieved, the thrill of victory makes groups want to continue to work together. Other shared objectives are sought, but alliances crumble due to the different perspectives which made the larger grouping so robust in its diversity.
  • Individual participants become disenchanted because of these dramas and depart from the larger grouping at the least, and often their orginial core group as well.

Essentially, people set aside basic debates while a pressing objective is at hand. In facilitation work, instigating projects is a great way to get people over their social anxieties and political differences in order to create bonds which later might surplant those issues. As my friend Slim once said on the twitters, “sweat is a far more honest social lubricant.” The issue is when those collusions are expected to last longer than is actually reasonable.

What I have been wondering is this: Why don’t we just shake hands after the larger objective has been achieved, and go on our merry ways? To me, this is far more sustainable culturally. Personally, one of the things which I love most about meeting people doing good work completely unrelated to my own is that there are so many things wrong in the world, in such intertwined and complex ways, if we were all working on the same aspect, no impact would be made. I don’t want to continue being joined forces, because I want to know you have my back in the larger scheme of things. Talk about the breakup before you start dating (or the “Founder’s Prenup“) – adults should be able to act like adults, even when they go their separate ways. Then you have the ability to work together on big things in the future, instead of still being butthurt about something that happened in the past.

I see this approach as similar to the move to portfolio-based employment from one long career employment. People associate with you for a discrete project based on what you’ve done in the past, which then gets added to your portfolio. Why not the same for social structures and political movements? We gather around a project, celebrate it when it’s done, and move on. Sometimes we end up working consistently with the same set of people because it makes a lot of sense, but it’s not the starting assumption. In my wariness, I don’t believe this will solve large problems, only allow us to fail for better reasons. Does anyone have any examples around this, of it working or not working, or at least being tried?

Potentially related: Temporary Autonomous Zones