The Encyclopedia Foundation, while obviously big fans of the late Dr. Isaac Asimov, are fans of a wide variety of other science fiction authors, too. One is “Brave New World”, by Aldous Huxley, where he describes a future dystopia where not only are people of varying degrees of intelligence, they are deliberately bred to be that way.
There is much to be said about that book, but for our purposes, we draw attention to his Caste System of Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Epsilons as, in order, Genius, Above Average, Average, Below Average and Mentally Handicapped. These are somewhat useful labels, as they are value neutral and simply designate a given level of intelligence with no undue judgments implied.
He wrote the book in the early 20th century and much research has been done since then. We usually represent the distribution of intellect as a bell curve, in which the vast majority of mankind falls into the categories of Beta, Gamma and Delta, with the very, very bright geniuses (Alphas) and the very, very challenged (Epsilons) being a minority on either side of the giant curve.
If you are wondering what this has to do with the Encyclopedia Foundation, it is this: To succeed in long term preservation of books, it is not enough to have books on metal plates to last ten thousand years. Or even a vault or building that may last 10,000 years. Sure, we can – and will – make all efforts to see to it that it would be decipherable even if we and our inheritors no longer existed. So that someone could come upon the books and with no aid from a person learn from them.
But that’s a long shot. It’s one that again, we’ll do, but it is only a “last resort”. The best case is for the Encyclopedia Foundation as an organization to continue to last for the entire 10,000 year period. And beyond.
And this is where we need to be “Gamma Friendly”. The problem is two fold.
One, the person who comes across the books, say, 6,495 years from now is – by the odds – going to be a Gamma. Were he unusually slow, he’d not be journeying about. Were he unusually bright, he’d probably have tribal, political or business responsibilities depending on the state of the collapse and rebuild. Given this, we cannot automatically assume that they can figure out all of our clever clues as to how to make use of the books. It would be handy then if there were still people of the Encyclopedia Foundation who at the least could explain the basics.
Do not misunderstand. Frankly, we believe that some of our means that we’ll employ are such that any Gamma can figure it out. That will be just another way we seek to be “Gamma Friendly”. But the friendliest of all would be to have some curator there to explain.
Two, such people as might inherit the Encyclopedia Foundation 100 years or 1,000 years from now are probably not going to be Alphas. Again, such as the Alphas usually already have their own concerns. We could hope for there to always be at least some Betas, as we have now, but we cannot even count on that. The Encyclopedia Foundation must always be geared to be run and maintained by Gammas.
Given this, everything must be kept as simple as possible. Or as the popular idiom has it, “KISS: Keep It Simple, Stupid”. We cannot be too large. We cannot take on too many things. We must strive to be very much like an ordinary household, wherein no more knowledge of math, planning, regulation following and such is required for us, then would be required for a large household.
Instructions, clearly wrote, must exist for the maintenance of the Encyclopedia Foundation. A basic literacy must be transmitted to each successive group of inheritors. Some of this may seem obvious now, but basic literacy is not always a “to be taken for granted” thing.
And of staggering importance is that the Encyclopedia Foundation always give incentive to those who are in it to stay in it. If at any time in the next 10,000 years it becomes easier for those running the Encyclopedia Foundation to leave it for a better opportunity, then all we could hope for then is that they at least shut the door behind them.
All efforts must be bent towards avoiding that. Such that even if some leave for a better opportunity, that others will be interested in joining to replace them and carry on.
While an Alpha or even a Beta can be tempted with just the goal itself, just the grand ideal, Gammas need a bit more concrete incentive. Hence our program of having the Caretaker live on site, and the attempt to grow to a size just sufficient enough to have a self-supporting monastery like group of members.
The goal for being “Gamma Friendly”, and also Self-Sufficient, is as simple to express as it is complex to carry out. An almost literal monastery. Or better put, an actual monastery, but without adhering to a specific church. This method worked for those in the Middle Ages who were laboring to preserve knowledge. And it can continue to work now.
True, such monasteries – like any other enterprise – do benefit from a Beta administrator, but such are not required. And happily enough, from any pool of Gammas going out of their way to join an organization, there is usually always at least a Gamma Plus or Beta Minus amongst them. And worst case, there is nothing inherently impossible in a regular average Joe – a Gamma – running a Monastery which when all is said and done is little more than a communal home.
As to how to form a monastery style organization, that is another article.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Thursday, May 5, 2011
The Danger of Donations
The Encyclopedia Foundation, inspired as we are by the late great Dr. Isaac Asimov, is no stranger to the lessons to be learned from the stories within his “Foundation Trilogy”.
One story was this, as quoted from the first book, “Foundation”:
“A horse having a wolf as a powerful and dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of his life. Being driven to desperation, it occurred to him to seek a strong ally. Whereupon he approached a man, and offered an alliance, pointing out that the wolf was likewise an enemy of the man. The man accepted the partnership at once and offered to kill the wolf immediately, if his new partner would only co-operate by placing his greater speed at the man’s disposal. The horse was willing, and allowed the man to place bridle and saddle upon him. The man mounted, hunted down the wolf, and killed him.
The horse, joyful and relieved, thanked the man, and said: ‘Now that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle and saddle and restore my freedom.’
Whereupon the man laughed loudly and replied, ‘Never!’ and applied the spurs with a will.”
That story was told by the character Salvor Hardin to the acting Head of State of a not-so-friendly power. The planet had accepted aid from Terminus, and now found that they were under the control of Terminus because of it.
Which leads us to question the value of donations. What are donations, and are they a good thing?
Well, at the Encyclopedia Foundation, we’ve noticed that donations usually don’t actually exist. No, we aren’t speaking of any failed fundraiser (we’ve never had one!) but rather our belief that “donations” as thought to be, don’t actually exist.
A donation is supposed to be distinct from a purchase. While if someone gives money to a store owner, and gets a good or service back, that is a purchase. But if you give money to a charity, you get nothing back, that is a donation.
Of course, it can be seen that this is not entirely true. One does get something from a donation, they at least get a good feeling of having supported a worthy cause. And that, while intangible, is no less of a purchased “thing” then the man who purchases the memory of a baseball game at Busch Stadium with his son. One can see that there is no actual thing as a pure donation, it is always a “purchase”.
When it comes to routine donations – such as ten bucks sent to Red Cross when tornados hit a region – it is actually a relatively simple purchase. You pay ten dollars, you now have the good feeling of knowing you helped. You also get the benefit of an additional deduction at tax time. That was “purchased”, too.
And for routine donations/purchases, that is all it is. You bought a feeling of lending a hand, and got a tax deduction.
When it comes to larger donations – purchases – it gets a bit more tricky. Those with large amounts of money to give out expect more than just a “good feeling”. They enjoy tax deductions, but can get those by giving to any charity. Thus a non-profit, a church, an educational institution, finds that they – like any business – are competing for the donation dollar.
One competes by offering more. More than just that good feeling and tax deduction. This could be as simple as a t-shirt saying “Greenpeace”. Or it could be the University Library named after you. It can be more, too.
And that’s where the problems start. “Free” things are usually the most costly of all, but while the adult child staying “rent free” at grandma’s place knows the staggeringly large hidden costs of that, many people running churches and charities and colleges seem to forget it. But donors giving “Free” money are like grandma’s giving “Free” room and board – they expect obedience, and no lip!
Consider the larger type donations, such as a wealthy patron might give. He may wish a library named after him. And he gets it. All done? No. There is next year. He might give again. What does he want? Ahh, that is for the University to figure out, and they will throw all manner of inducements at him. And he’ll take them – and then tell them what he really wants, and get that, too!
I was struck by a quote in another scifi author’s book, “The Number of the Beast” by Robert Heinlein. He had one of the character’s say, “I’ve heard that there are things no whore will do for money, but I have yet to find ANYTHING that a University Chancellor faced with a deficit will boggle at…”
The wealthy donor’s child being admitted with substandard grades? No problem, they did that without him asking. Invites to any and all campus events? Of course, of course, chump change. Was the child involved in a regrettable “incident”? That’s okay, that’s why the University has their own police force – so that they can better serve the special needs of their Alumni and students!
Now comes the actual time of the hoped for donation. The University has worked for it, they have hoped for it, they have already sold portions of their soul for it…and he asks for a spot on the Board, for himself or someone he knows. And if the donation is large enough, he’ll get it, too. Or equivalencies. Appointments or promotions or demotions of various faculty or staff. A hand in the curriculum. A say in where a construction contract for a new facility will go. Usually to a firm that has his – or a friend’s – last name in it. Etc.
Of course, no one doubts that it would take a very large donor to accomplish this at a large university. Just as no one doubts that it would take far smaller donations to accomplish the equivalent at a local church of 35 members. But be it store front church or Ivy League University, the major money is going to purchase not “good feelings” but power. The purchase is actually of the Institution itself, as much or as little as the purchaser (donor) cares to afford.
In theory, there is no problem in this. The donor has the best interests of the institution – be it church or college or charity – at heart, so obviously wishes it to succeed. True enough. But there are many paths to “success”, many ways of growing, many directions to take, and it is doubtful that his is the same as the current Board and leadership. He’d hardly need to donate if the college, church or charity was already doing exactly as he wished, and going exactly where he wished it to go.
No, the large donations are solely to purchase control and swerve the institution into a more desirable – for the donor – course.
And what if any institution accepts a large yearly gift from a donor who asks for nothing? Wait. Watch. After five years, when the institution has grown because of that counted upon annual gift, then the price will come due soon enough. For a common feature of most of our culture’s institutions is that as hard as “growing larger” is, going back to a smaller level is pretty much impossible. You grow, at least stay the same, or die.
Thus the institution seeking funds is like the horse. And the benefactor with large amounts of money to donate is the man. And the goal of the institution is the wolf. The institution accepts the donor’s “bridle and saddle” to achieve the goal, but does not find it very easy to shake the donor off afterwards. Thus one should be careful of who a large donor is and what their motivations are.
That would seem to be easy enough, and for most institutions – including the Encyclopedia Foundation – there is little danger as no long lines of large benefactors are forming at our doorsteps! But if an institution does not have a large donor/benefactor, they are not as yet out of the woods.
Other places for donations besides the mega-rich man is grant bestowing foundations, corporations, and the government. And given the sums they toss, they don’t even play at being kind like the rich man does, they just flat out tell you what you will and will not do. And there are no “no strings attached” grants, when you see one that looks like that, it just means that rather than them ask something specific from you, they’ll just let you dance even harder trying to anticipate what will secure the grant’s renewal.
Then there’s the last means of routine donations, the regular $10 man, per month or one time. These are perhaps the safest donations, in that no single person is donating enough to expect more than access to your monthly online newsletter. Perhaps a t-shirt if they are a $35 “big spender”. Or even “membership” if they agree to a monthly pittance, “membership” being semantically equal to “newsletter subscriber” at best.
Yet are these entirely safe? For all short term practical purposes, they are somewhat safe. The “membership” expects only what was offered up front. A feeling of doing good, of belonging, and perhaps a t-shirt or ball cap so as to let others know he is special. But in the aggregate, they are donating much, and an institution, especially a long term institution, should be sensitive to things that can change that.
Why? Well, it can be like the poor fool who was cursed winning the lottery. True, he feels he’s lucky. He won ten million dollars and promptly bought a 3.5 million dollar mansion. No one told him that the upkeep on such was $50,000 per month, not to mention property taxes that exceed per year what his entire extended family made in the past 20 years. He quickly blows through the remaining money, and as his level is now too high to support by his labors, the moment the lottery money stops, all is lost.
Lots of people donate. And lots do so “long term”, that is on a monthly basis. But will they always? Fads come and go, what is in, what is out, cause of the week, cause even of a generation. At one time, the John Birch Society brought in quite a bit of revenue each year from tens of thousands of members who feared the Communist Menace. For that matter, the Ku Klux Klan used to be fabulously wealthy and influential as recently as the nineteen twenties. We do not believe that either are doing quite so well today.
Finally, you have bequests. These actually are safe. Well, so long as you can comply with the request that always comes with it!!
Does this mean that one should never accept donations? No. It means this:
1. Know the large donor and know exactly what he wishes up front. If you must, then as much at hurts, pass up the donation. An atheistic free market philosopher was once said to have turned down a million dollars to re-write her individualistic philosophy to reflect a belief in God. If you wish control of your organization, you must be willing to do the same.
This can be something that affects little charities and churches. Even some “gifts” in themselves are not worth it, such as someone wishing to donate a house that is actually condemned. Such a “gift” may just stick you with the taxes and demolition costs that you don’t have. Or you may have the capital to fix it up and generate revenue for your non-profit. Know which first!
2. One can say this for grant giving Foundations and corporations – they do tell you what they expect up front. If this is where your mission is going, great. If not, one should avoid getting into the habit of modifying the mission to be able to accept more money. Money is a means to the end, and the end should be your mission. There are limits to how much you can change, before you are just now in it for the money.
3. Government grants are honest to the extent that they are up front about their interests. It was Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who in a case about whether the government had any say in the type of art it subsidized, or whether the first amendment said they did not, ruled, “The First Amendment has not repealed the ancient rule of life, that he who pays the piper calls the tune.”
That’s pretty clear. Take their money – do as you are told. They will let you know in advance what that is, so like a grant making Foundation, it may be okay. Maybe.
4. Having a large dues paying membership can be a future trap. If you come to rely on it, if your size grows to the point where you depend on it, you will find yourself shifting your mission, not at the member’s requests, but because you’ll fear losing membership. Let your fellow director post an article in your newsletter and it generate some angry comments from your membership – and a subscription or ten cancelled – and you’ll see that those members have a bit more say than you thought.
Because your first thought – and the one you’ll ultimately go with – will be to not let that Director write another article, and probably have an apology printed, too! Congratulations, the members just took control – even if only a little – of your organization.
And there is the long term problem of their continued interest. The youth who in college joins “PETA” to impress his girlfriend with his love of our animal brothers and sisters is probably not going to be donating for more than four years, tops. True, nimble organizations can take this into account, and always be planning on existing off the donations of each new fresh crop of college idealists, with even the benefit of keeping a percent of them for longer. You can do this. But prepare for it in advance, and don’t grow too big before you have this locked in.
Another concern with having a large dues paying membership – in a church or charity – is that such large amounts of revenue can attract to your organization those who just want that revenue. Churches and charities have both found themselves “hijacked” when it turned out that some who applied for positions of power and authority within the organization really just wanted to get the money. Be that the power to award contracts to their construction friends, or to direct the charity to assist those they like, or even a flat out looting. Big money attracts those who love big money. Be prepared, and remember that bigger isn’t always better.
And of course, a large member base still almost always ends in heartache as for the real long term, causes and come and go. While some seem to have staying power – like the Red Cross – others are like the Anti-Saloon Movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Dead, for lack of enough people caring any more. Or the Klan or the Birchers. Your organization does not have to be right or wrong for the long term. But if it is going to depend on the masses of donors, then it must stay relevant to the masses of donors.
Or be able to do without them.
5. Bequests. These are the simplest and easiest. The person giving them is dead, he left one clear request and that’s that. Assuming it’s not too bizarre, take it and use it. However, do not use it to grow to a size that your normal revenue cannot support.
Now then, what does all of this mean for the Encyclopedia Foundation? It means that we, like the monasteries of old, do not want to rely on donations. We wish them, yes. But we do not want any change in the mission. We do not wish to rely on any current fad. We wish to be able to survive as a self-sufficient entity so that if donations come in, great, we can use them, but if they do not, fine, we are still okay. A donation should be treated like you’d responsibly treat a lottery windfall. Use it to pay off some past projects, use it to fulfill your current projects, but don’t use it to fund new and bigger projects. You might not be able to support those – over the long haul.
As to the manner of self-sufficiency in these modern times, that is another article.
One story was this, as quoted from the first book, “Foundation”:
“A horse having a wolf as a powerful and dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of his life. Being driven to desperation, it occurred to him to seek a strong ally. Whereupon he approached a man, and offered an alliance, pointing out that the wolf was likewise an enemy of the man. The man accepted the partnership at once and offered to kill the wolf immediately, if his new partner would only co-operate by placing his greater speed at the man’s disposal. The horse was willing, and allowed the man to place bridle and saddle upon him. The man mounted, hunted down the wolf, and killed him.
The horse, joyful and relieved, thanked the man, and said: ‘Now that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle and saddle and restore my freedom.’
Whereupon the man laughed loudly and replied, ‘Never!’ and applied the spurs with a will.”
That story was told by the character Salvor Hardin to the acting Head of State of a not-so-friendly power. The planet had accepted aid from Terminus, and now found that they were under the control of Terminus because of it.
Which leads us to question the value of donations. What are donations, and are they a good thing?
Well, at the Encyclopedia Foundation, we’ve noticed that donations usually don’t actually exist. No, we aren’t speaking of any failed fundraiser (we’ve never had one!) but rather our belief that “donations” as thought to be, don’t actually exist.
A donation is supposed to be distinct from a purchase. While if someone gives money to a store owner, and gets a good or service back, that is a purchase. But if you give money to a charity, you get nothing back, that is a donation.
Of course, it can be seen that this is not entirely true. One does get something from a donation, they at least get a good feeling of having supported a worthy cause. And that, while intangible, is no less of a purchased “thing” then the man who purchases the memory of a baseball game at Busch Stadium with his son. One can see that there is no actual thing as a pure donation, it is always a “purchase”.
When it comes to routine donations – such as ten bucks sent to Red Cross when tornados hit a region – it is actually a relatively simple purchase. You pay ten dollars, you now have the good feeling of knowing you helped. You also get the benefit of an additional deduction at tax time. That was “purchased”, too.
And for routine donations/purchases, that is all it is. You bought a feeling of lending a hand, and got a tax deduction.
When it comes to larger donations – purchases – it gets a bit more tricky. Those with large amounts of money to give out expect more than just a “good feeling”. They enjoy tax deductions, but can get those by giving to any charity. Thus a non-profit, a church, an educational institution, finds that they – like any business – are competing for the donation dollar.
One competes by offering more. More than just that good feeling and tax deduction. This could be as simple as a t-shirt saying “Greenpeace”. Or it could be the University Library named after you. It can be more, too.
And that’s where the problems start. “Free” things are usually the most costly of all, but while the adult child staying “rent free” at grandma’s place knows the staggeringly large hidden costs of that, many people running churches and charities and colleges seem to forget it. But donors giving “Free” money are like grandma’s giving “Free” room and board – they expect obedience, and no lip!
Consider the larger type donations, such as a wealthy patron might give. He may wish a library named after him. And he gets it. All done? No. There is next year. He might give again. What does he want? Ahh, that is for the University to figure out, and they will throw all manner of inducements at him. And he’ll take them – and then tell them what he really wants, and get that, too!
I was struck by a quote in another scifi author’s book, “The Number of the Beast” by Robert Heinlein. He had one of the character’s say, “I’ve heard that there are things no whore will do for money, but I have yet to find ANYTHING that a University Chancellor faced with a deficit will boggle at…”
The wealthy donor’s child being admitted with substandard grades? No problem, they did that without him asking. Invites to any and all campus events? Of course, of course, chump change. Was the child involved in a regrettable “incident”? That’s okay, that’s why the University has their own police force – so that they can better serve the special needs of their Alumni and students!
Now comes the actual time of the hoped for donation. The University has worked for it, they have hoped for it, they have already sold portions of their soul for it…and he asks for a spot on the Board, for himself or someone he knows. And if the donation is large enough, he’ll get it, too. Or equivalencies. Appointments or promotions or demotions of various faculty or staff. A hand in the curriculum. A say in where a construction contract for a new facility will go. Usually to a firm that has his – or a friend’s – last name in it. Etc.
Of course, no one doubts that it would take a very large donor to accomplish this at a large university. Just as no one doubts that it would take far smaller donations to accomplish the equivalent at a local church of 35 members. But be it store front church or Ivy League University, the major money is going to purchase not “good feelings” but power. The purchase is actually of the Institution itself, as much or as little as the purchaser (donor) cares to afford.
In theory, there is no problem in this. The donor has the best interests of the institution – be it church or college or charity – at heart, so obviously wishes it to succeed. True enough. But there are many paths to “success”, many ways of growing, many directions to take, and it is doubtful that his is the same as the current Board and leadership. He’d hardly need to donate if the college, church or charity was already doing exactly as he wished, and going exactly where he wished it to go.
No, the large donations are solely to purchase control and swerve the institution into a more desirable – for the donor – course.
And what if any institution accepts a large yearly gift from a donor who asks for nothing? Wait. Watch. After five years, when the institution has grown because of that counted upon annual gift, then the price will come due soon enough. For a common feature of most of our culture’s institutions is that as hard as “growing larger” is, going back to a smaller level is pretty much impossible. You grow, at least stay the same, or die.
Thus the institution seeking funds is like the horse. And the benefactor with large amounts of money to donate is the man. And the goal of the institution is the wolf. The institution accepts the donor’s “bridle and saddle” to achieve the goal, but does not find it very easy to shake the donor off afterwards. Thus one should be careful of who a large donor is and what their motivations are.
That would seem to be easy enough, and for most institutions – including the Encyclopedia Foundation – there is little danger as no long lines of large benefactors are forming at our doorsteps! But if an institution does not have a large donor/benefactor, they are not as yet out of the woods.
Other places for donations besides the mega-rich man is grant bestowing foundations, corporations, and the government. And given the sums they toss, they don’t even play at being kind like the rich man does, they just flat out tell you what you will and will not do. And there are no “no strings attached” grants, when you see one that looks like that, it just means that rather than them ask something specific from you, they’ll just let you dance even harder trying to anticipate what will secure the grant’s renewal.
Then there’s the last means of routine donations, the regular $10 man, per month or one time. These are perhaps the safest donations, in that no single person is donating enough to expect more than access to your monthly online newsletter. Perhaps a t-shirt if they are a $35 “big spender”. Or even “membership” if they agree to a monthly pittance, “membership” being semantically equal to “newsletter subscriber” at best.
Yet are these entirely safe? For all short term practical purposes, they are somewhat safe. The “membership” expects only what was offered up front. A feeling of doing good, of belonging, and perhaps a t-shirt or ball cap so as to let others know he is special. But in the aggregate, they are donating much, and an institution, especially a long term institution, should be sensitive to things that can change that.
Why? Well, it can be like the poor fool who was cursed winning the lottery. True, he feels he’s lucky. He won ten million dollars and promptly bought a 3.5 million dollar mansion. No one told him that the upkeep on such was $50,000 per month, not to mention property taxes that exceed per year what his entire extended family made in the past 20 years. He quickly blows through the remaining money, and as his level is now too high to support by his labors, the moment the lottery money stops, all is lost.
Lots of people donate. And lots do so “long term”, that is on a monthly basis. But will they always? Fads come and go, what is in, what is out, cause of the week, cause even of a generation. At one time, the John Birch Society brought in quite a bit of revenue each year from tens of thousands of members who feared the Communist Menace. For that matter, the Ku Klux Klan used to be fabulously wealthy and influential as recently as the nineteen twenties. We do not believe that either are doing quite so well today.
Finally, you have bequests. These actually are safe. Well, so long as you can comply with the request that always comes with it!!
Does this mean that one should never accept donations? No. It means this:
1. Know the large donor and know exactly what he wishes up front. If you must, then as much at hurts, pass up the donation. An atheistic free market philosopher was once said to have turned down a million dollars to re-write her individualistic philosophy to reflect a belief in God. If you wish control of your organization, you must be willing to do the same.
This can be something that affects little charities and churches. Even some “gifts” in themselves are not worth it, such as someone wishing to donate a house that is actually condemned. Such a “gift” may just stick you with the taxes and demolition costs that you don’t have. Or you may have the capital to fix it up and generate revenue for your non-profit. Know which first!
2. One can say this for grant giving Foundations and corporations – they do tell you what they expect up front. If this is where your mission is going, great. If not, one should avoid getting into the habit of modifying the mission to be able to accept more money. Money is a means to the end, and the end should be your mission. There are limits to how much you can change, before you are just now in it for the money.
3. Government grants are honest to the extent that they are up front about their interests. It was Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who in a case about whether the government had any say in the type of art it subsidized, or whether the first amendment said they did not, ruled, “The First Amendment has not repealed the ancient rule of life, that he who pays the piper calls the tune.”
That’s pretty clear. Take their money – do as you are told. They will let you know in advance what that is, so like a grant making Foundation, it may be okay. Maybe.
4. Having a large dues paying membership can be a future trap. If you come to rely on it, if your size grows to the point where you depend on it, you will find yourself shifting your mission, not at the member’s requests, but because you’ll fear losing membership. Let your fellow director post an article in your newsletter and it generate some angry comments from your membership – and a subscription or ten cancelled – and you’ll see that those members have a bit more say than you thought.
Because your first thought – and the one you’ll ultimately go with – will be to not let that Director write another article, and probably have an apology printed, too! Congratulations, the members just took control – even if only a little – of your organization.
And there is the long term problem of their continued interest. The youth who in college joins “PETA” to impress his girlfriend with his love of our animal brothers and sisters is probably not going to be donating for more than four years, tops. True, nimble organizations can take this into account, and always be planning on existing off the donations of each new fresh crop of college idealists, with even the benefit of keeping a percent of them for longer. You can do this. But prepare for it in advance, and don’t grow too big before you have this locked in.
Another concern with having a large dues paying membership – in a church or charity – is that such large amounts of revenue can attract to your organization those who just want that revenue. Churches and charities have both found themselves “hijacked” when it turned out that some who applied for positions of power and authority within the organization really just wanted to get the money. Be that the power to award contracts to their construction friends, or to direct the charity to assist those they like, or even a flat out looting. Big money attracts those who love big money. Be prepared, and remember that bigger isn’t always better.
And of course, a large member base still almost always ends in heartache as for the real long term, causes and come and go. While some seem to have staying power – like the Red Cross – others are like the Anti-Saloon Movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Dead, for lack of enough people caring any more. Or the Klan or the Birchers. Your organization does not have to be right or wrong for the long term. But if it is going to depend on the masses of donors, then it must stay relevant to the masses of donors.
Or be able to do without them.
5. Bequests. These are the simplest and easiest. The person giving them is dead, he left one clear request and that’s that. Assuming it’s not too bizarre, take it and use it. However, do not use it to grow to a size that your normal revenue cannot support.
Now then, what does all of this mean for the Encyclopedia Foundation? It means that we, like the monasteries of old, do not want to rely on donations. We wish them, yes. But we do not want any change in the mission. We do not wish to rely on any current fad. We wish to be able to survive as a self-sufficient entity so that if donations come in, great, we can use them, but if they do not, fine, we are still okay. A donation should be treated like you’d responsibly treat a lottery windfall. Use it to pay off some past projects, use it to fulfill your current projects, but don’t use it to fund new and bigger projects. You might not be able to support those – over the long haul.
As to the manner of self-sufficiency in these modern times, that is another article.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Long News: Ideas of the 2nd Millennium
The Encyclopedia Foundation recently posted a list of the top five inventions of the 2nd millennia. But we made mention in that article that a list of the top five ideas would have merit as well.
And like the inventions, we are not going to list out every cool, important, or even ground shaking idea, but rather the large and broad ideas that had many ramifications and from which other ideas could come about. One could speak of the ideas of 1,000 different religious opinions, several dozen of which were even ground shaking. Or one could speak on the granddaddy idea that one is allowed religious opinions. While the Encyclopedia Foundation listed the most important invention as “Number One” in another article, those inventions were not necessarily listed in order past that.
In this list, we will tentatively list the first one as the number one idea. However, while both ideas three and five are derived from it, we suspect that idea five, derived as it is, will become increasingly important within a century or so. More so than the idea it sprang from.
Ideas:
1. The re-introduction and refinement of the Scientific Method in the 11th, 12th and 16th century. There are many contenders as to the “name” of the person, from Alhazen and Aquinas to Roger Bacon and Renee Descartes. But the importance of the idea is unquestioned. Our technological culture depends upon the continued gathering and systemizing the data we can gather from our observations of our universe. And applying it to increase our mastery over the environment, and to develop better and cheaper technologies. (The Encyclopedia Foundation notes that it was not until the printing press that the idea stayed around and was spread far and wide.)
2. A man may know and commune with his Creator directly, 15th century through 20th century. We could credit Martin Luther or Thomas Jefferson, in truth many contributed to this idea. That one could personally have a religion and a relation with a god but not be subservient to a religious hierarchy was an important breakthrough with several large ramifications. By acknowledging that how a man worshipped was his business, it led to the acceptance of those who chose not to worship any god at all. By separating religion from governmental control or societal pressure, it gave rise to the idea that a law superior to governmental edicts or cultural mores was possible. Competition was thus introduced to the way we establish rules, and Earthly governments and social movements were forced to compete with mankind’s various conceptions of “heavenly justice”. Freedom from a specific worship, and freedom not to worship also opened up more scientific inquiry, and more scientists felt free to publish findings that in other times would have got them killed. It also had an effect on the religions themselves, as with many competing types the message had to be one of peace and light, not hellfire and brimstone, so as to attract “customers” who could now attend or not as they liked.
3. Measurements from the 13th century to the 20th century. From the clock measuring time, to the French developing the Metric system, to various international bodies of scientists adopting uniform measurements of every phenomena, this has made possible a far more rapid advance of science than would otherwise have taken place. Not to mention making a global economy possible. It also made things more rigorous and precise, which means that the words and symbols we use to describe reality more closely resemble that which they are describing. None of these measurements caught on quickly, all had opposition, but they all were regarded as good afterwards. Regrettably the trend toward standardization petered out before various languages, alphabets and number system could be done.
4. Re-introduction of Rule of Law. In the sense of the law applying to all, even the leader, this was a long lost concept. Credit is generally given to the Magna Carta of the 13th century. Not always followed, slow to catch on even in England where it originated, it had many far reaching effects. One was that eventually almost every nation on Earth would adopt an official “charter” or “constitution” which – at least in theory – would demark the limits of governmental authority. It may be noted that such boundaries are routinely ignored, however, the mere existence of boundaries does tend to slow any current generation of leaders inclined to go too far.
5. The assembly line of the 16th, 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries AND the interchangeability of parts. Not reaching peak until the 20th century, this idea has had a profound effect on how we do business, how we work, and how we think about things. One large effect is that it was able to drop the unit price of almost any manufactured good to the point where the vast majority of any given market could afford it. It also allowed the employment of vast numbers of unskilled laborers who could be easily trained to perform one simple repetitive task, thus transforming a “peasant” into an integral part of the assembly line itself. Indeed, a chief complaint was that it dehumanized the workers in such an environment (they were the first “interchangeable parts”), and no small part of various corporation’s push for robotics is to remove the human from the assembly line so as to smooth out persistent “differences”. The assembly line (which actually subsumes interchangeability) as an idea was also incorporated into all aspects of corporate life, streamlining, refining and then laying out definitive “hand books” and “manual of procedures” for how all aspects of running a business would be done. This standardizing of every work environment there is, from factories to farms to offices is made possible in part by increased advances in robotics and computers. But most of all, it is the idea alone that does it, not the machines themselves.
Example: A loan officer for a bank 100 years ago – or even 50 years ago – was a position of great responsibility. But also of high intelligence and intuition. Now they are line office workers, who still need to be responsible, but no longer need be highly intelligent or intuitive. Their job has been standardized, they accept the loan application, plug the numbers into the computer, and the policy book (on the computer) will tell them “yes” or “no” and “how much”. They are “interchangeable” in that any one of a given level of education and social class can do it. So much so that those who hire them have their own procedures to follow, and the interview is simply choosing amongst the pool that the manual permits them to employ.
Currently, the complaint is no longer that it “dehumanizes” those involved. The complaint is increasingly that there are less and less people involved. A corporation used to have many tiers from the Board of Directors, the Executives, the Middle Managers, the Office Staff and the Line Workers. Now they are more likely to have a board, fewer executives, even fewer middle managers, plenty of office staff following policy manuals and far less line workers (but far more robots and machines and computers). Where that ultimately leads, time will tell. It is notable that the only thing not fully “standardized” in our machine culture is the people. Yet.
And like the inventions, we are not going to list out every cool, important, or even ground shaking idea, but rather the large and broad ideas that had many ramifications and from which other ideas could come about. One could speak of the ideas of 1,000 different religious opinions, several dozen of which were even ground shaking. Or one could speak on the granddaddy idea that one is allowed religious opinions. While the Encyclopedia Foundation listed the most important invention as “Number One” in another article, those inventions were not necessarily listed in order past that.
In this list, we will tentatively list the first one as the number one idea. However, while both ideas three and five are derived from it, we suspect that idea five, derived as it is, will become increasingly important within a century or so. More so than the idea it sprang from.
Ideas:
1. The re-introduction and refinement of the Scientific Method in the 11th, 12th and 16th century. There are many contenders as to the “name” of the person, from Alhazen and Aquinas to Roger Bacon and Renee Descartes. But the importance of the idea is unquestioned. Our technological culture depends upon the continued gathering and systemizing the data we can gather from our observations of our universe. And applying it to increase our mastery over the environment, and to develop better and cheaper technologies. (The Encyclopedia Foundation notes that it was not until the printing press that the idea stayed around and was spread far and wide.)
2. A man may know and commune with his Creator directly, 15th century through 20th century. We could credit Martin Luther or Thomas Jefferson, in truth many contributed to this idea. That one could personally have a religion and a relation with a god but not be subservient to a religious hierarchy was an important breakthrough with several large ramifications. By acknowledging that how a man worshipped was his business, it led to the acceptance of those who chose not to worship any god at all. By separating religion from governmental control or societal pressure, it gave rise to the idea that a law superior to governmental edicts or cultural mores was possible. Competition was thus introduced to the way we establish rules, and Earthly governments and social movements were forced to compete with mankind’s various conceptions of “heavenly justice”. Freedom from a specific worship, and freedom not to worship also opened up more scientific inquiry, and more scientists felt free to publish findings that in other times would have got them killed. It also had an effect on the religions themselves, as with many competing types the message had to be one of peace and light, not hellfire and brimstone, so as to attract “customers” who could now attend or not as they liked.
3. Measurements from the 13th century to the 20th century. From the clock measuring time, to the French developing the Metric system, to various international bodies of scientists adopting uniform measurements of every phenomena, this has made possible a far more rapid advance of science than would otherwise have taken place. Not to mention making a global economy possible. It also made things more rigorous and precise, which means that the words and symbols we use to describe reality more closely resemble that which they are describing. None of these measurements caught on quickly, all had opposition, but they all were regarded as good afterwards. Regrettably the trend toward standardization petered out before various languages, alphabets and number system could be done.
4. Re-introduction of Rule of Law. In the sense of the law applying to all, even the leader, this was a long lost concept. Credit is generally given to the Magna Carta of the 13th century. Not always followed, slow to catch on even in England where it originated, it had many far reaching effects. One was that eventually almost every nation on Earth would adopt an official “charter” or “constitution” which – at least in theory – would demark the limits of governmental authority. It may be noted that such boundaries are routinely ignored, however, the mere existence of boundaries does tend to slow any current generation of leaders inclined to go too far.
5. The assembly line of the 16th, 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries AND the interchangeability of parts. Not reaching peak until the 20th century, this idea has had a profound effect on how we do business, how we work, and how we think about things. One large effect is that it was able to drop the unit price of almost any manufactured good to the point where the vast majority of any given market could afford it. It also allowed the employment of vast numbers of unskilled laborers who could be easily trained to perform one simple repetitive task, thus transforming a “peasant” into an integral part of the assembly line itself. Indeed, a chief complaint was that it dehumanized the workers in such an environment (they were the first “interchangeable parts”), and no small part of various corporation’s push for robotics is to remove the human from the assembly line so as to smooth out persistent “differences”. The assembly line (which actually subsumes interchangeability) as an idea was also incorporated into all aspects of corporate life, streamlining, refining and then laying out definitive “hand books” and “manual of procedures” for how all aspects of running a business would be done. This standardizing of every work environment there is, from factories to farms to offices is made possible in part by increased advances in robotics and computers. But most of all, it is the idea alone that does it, not the machines themselves.
Example: A loan officer for a bank 100 years ago – or even 50 years ago – was a position of great responsibility. But also of high intelligence and intuition. Now they are line office workers, who still need to be responsible, but no longer need be highly intelligent or intuitive. Their job has been standardized, they accept the loan application, plug the numbers into the computer, and the policy book (on the computer) will tell them “yes” or “no” and “how much”. They are “interchangeable” in that any one of a given level of education and social class can do it. So much so that those who hire them have their own procedures to follow, and the interview is simply choosing amongst the pool that the manual permits them to employ.
Currently, the complaint is no longer that it “dehumanizes” those involved. The complaint is increasingly that there are less and less people involved. A corporation used to have many tiers from the Board of Directors, the Executives, the Middle Managers, the Office Staff and the Line Workers. Now they are more likely to have a board, fewer executives, even fewer middle managers, plenty of office staff following policy manuals and far less line workers (but far more robots and machines and computers). Where that ultimately leads, time will tell. It is notable that the only thing not fully “standardized” in our machine culture is the people. Yet.
Long News: Inventions of the 2nd Millennium
The Encyclopedia Foundation recently posted a blog article about “long news”. This term apparently is subject to differing interpretations, all valid. For the Long Now Foundation, it has to do with contemporary news stories that may still be of relevance up to 10,000 years from now.
The Encyclopedia Foundation posted a differing interpretation, that of considering a 200 year span a “day”, and thus reporting on the events since 01811 which in this system of measurement would be noon yesterday.
The point was that, as commentators on TV who speak of “The Trial of the Century” may justly be thought to be jumping the gun, so attempting to predict what news will be relevant 10,000 years from now maybe premature when the “news” has only come out in the last cosmic second or two.
But might it not be appropriate, after a century is over, to judge from the perspective of time which trial was indeed the “Trial of the Century”? Sure. The facts are all in when the century is over, and if you allow a bit of time for mulling it over, one could then offer up a good suggestion as to what would ultimately – even more years from now – bear the title. One could suggest that not only must the period of time be over, but that all those alive when it took place be dead. Distance does lend perspective. However, there is certainly no harm in giving opinions. Those too are “data” and can be reviewed by future generations who have no personal interest – or at least less personal interest – in the outcome.
At the Encyclopedia Foundation, we can’t help but notice that the second millennium is now over. So it occurs to us that this would be an opportune time for a “first assessment” of exactly what the “long news” of it was, what things are worth remembering, what things made a difference, and what might – just might – last as a noteworthy item for the next 10,000 years.
They are, of course, only suggestions. Time will tell how relevant they actually are from a longer historical perspective.
We are aware that such lists have been made before. However, we note a very superficial focus on “inventions” that while important, and even making for enormous cultural changes, are off springs of earlier inventions. One could list every make and model of each car, but wouldn’t it make more sense to cite the invention of the car? Likewise, and from a broad perspective, aren’t all the mechanized means of transport from a steam locomotive to an automobile to a plane to a rocket all a result of the original harnessing of steam power?
With that broader view in mind, the Encyclopedia Foundation will not be listing out a thousand unique inventions, no matter how clever and original each of them may have been. We are focusing on the broadest of the broad, of the past 1,000 years.
Also, when it comes to events that may be of millennial importance, more than “inventions” should be on the list. Ideas would seem to have a place. In government, in religion, in philosophy. Discoveries would also have a place. Of new lands, new moons, new worlds. Of course, the same criterion applies to ideas and discoveries as applies to inventions. One does not list out each island and continent discovered, or each moon or planet. Or every innovation in religion, government and philosophy.
Which were the key ones? Which were the roots that grew into trees with a variety of branches?
For this article, the Encyclopedia Foundation offers the top five inventions. Ideas and discoveries are for later.
Inventions:
1. The Printing Press by Gutenberg in the 15th century. Of all the inventions, this is the one that led all other inventions, ideas and discoveries being known and built off of. Prior to this, one could only learn about new things by word of mouth or if one had a staggeringly valuable hand wrote book on the topic. The ability to describe one’s discovery, idea or invention in print and mass produce it let ideas spread more rapidly than ever before. Were it not for the printing press freezing into words the other ideas and discoveries listed here, then those may have died early deaths, or been confined to local regions.
2. The Clock by monks of the 13th century. Without the clock the concept of “time” was far different than nowadays. And without the ability to measure time, all manner of science and technology would not only be impossible, but would not even occur to a person raised with no concept of it. Not only that, but the changes this made in the manner in which we work and exchange goods and services would revolutionize labor, creating situations which led to substantial unrest until the masses could be trained to accept this. We note that the invention of the Gregorian Calendar of the 16th century was important in this regard, too, but the clock was the “something new”.
3. The lenses of the 16th and 17th century (telescope and microscope). These would open up two new worlds to mankind, the macroscopic heavens and the microscopic cellular life and chemicals. This would have a profound impact in philosophy and religion as well, calling into question the Earth’s role in the Universe and man’s role as a unique being amongst animals. It would be what allowed the eventual breakthroughs in medical science, hygiene and manipulation of chemicals. Also space flight, our satellites and even our methods of warfare, such as intercontinental ballistic missiles.
4. The Steam Engine of the 18th century. While played with before, this time people took it seriously. Due perhaps to being able to build more precise and powerful versions than before. It led to the mechanization of the world, freeing mankind from reliance on muscle, wind, water and animal power which had been our mainstays for all of history. The rise in productivity, and existence of the scientific method, let the steam engine lead to ever more applications and usages, and spurred more inventions based on the idea of the machine. Internal combustion engines and electrical and electronic machines are each a result of the original harnessing of steam power in mechanical form.
5. The Computer of the 19th century. Invented by Charles Babbage in 01822, it was not until it was done in an electronic form – as opposed to mechanical – that it really took off. The ability to store and manipulate staggeringly large volumes of data is so recent a development that we are still only now exploring all the possibilities and ramifications. While very recent, it has done so much so fast that it can be confidently included in this list.
The Encyclopedia Foundation posted a differing interpretation, that of considering a 200 year span a “day”, and thus reporting on the events since 01811 which in this system of measurement would be noon yesterday.
The point was that, as commentators on TV who speak of “The Trial of the Century” may justly be thought to be jumping the gun, so attempting to predict what news will be relevant 10,000 years from now maybe premature when the “news” has only come out in the last cosmic second or two.
But might it not be appropriate, after a century is over, to judge from the perspective of time which trial was indeed the “Trial of the Century”? Sure. The facts are all in when the century is over, and if you allow a bit of time for mulling it over, one could then offer up a good suggestion as to what would ultimately – even more years from now – bear the title. One could suggest that not only must the period of time be over, but that all those alive when it took place be dead. Distance does lend perspective. However, there is certainly no harm in giving opinions. Those too are “data” and can be reviewed by future generations who have no personal interest – or at least less personal interest – in the outcome.
At the Encyclopedia Foundation, we can’t help but notice that the second millennium is now over. So it occurs to us that this would be an opportune time for a “first assessment” of exactly what the “long news” of it was, what things are worth remembering, what things made a difference, and what might – just might – last as a noteworthy item for the next 10,000 years.
They are, of course, only suggestions. Time will tell how relevant they actually are from a longer historical perspective.
We are aware that such lists have been made before. However, we note a very superficial focus on “inventions” that while important, and even making for enormous cultural changes, are off springs of earlier inventions. One could list every make and model of each car, but wouldn’t it make more sense to cite the invention of the car? Likewise, and from a broad perspective, aren’t all the mechanized means of transport from a steam locomotive to an automobile to a plane to a rocket all a result of the original harnessing of steam power?
With that broader view in mind, the Encyclopedia Foundation will not be listing out a thousand unique inventions, no matter how clever and original each of them may have been. We are focusing on the broadest of the broad, of the past 1,000 years.
Also, when it comes to events that may be of millennial importance, more than “inventions” should be on the list. Ideas would seem to have a place. In government, in religion, in philosophy. Discoveries would also have a place. Of new lands, new moons, new worlds. Of course, the same criterion applies to ideas and discoveries as applies to inventions. One does not list out each island and continent discovered, or each moon or planet. Or every innovation in religion, government and philosophy.
Which were the key ones? Which were the roots that grew into trees with a variety of branches?
For this article, the Encyclopedia Foundation offers the top five inventions. Ideas and discoveries are for later.
Inventions:
1. The Printing Press by Gutenberg in the 15th century. Of all the inventions, this is the one that led all other inventions, ideas and discoveries being known and built off of. Prior to this, one could only learn about new things by word of mouth or if one had a staggeringly valuable hand wrote book on the topic. The ability to describe one’s discovery, idea or invention in print and mass produce it let ideas spread more rapidly than ever before. Were it not for the printing press freezing into words the other ideas and discoveries listed here, then those may have died early deaths, or been confined to local regions.
2. The Clock by monks of the 13th century. Without the clock the concept of “time” was far different than nowadays. And without the ability to measure time, all manner of science and technology would not only be impossible, but would not even occur to a person raised with no concept of it. Not only that, but the changes this made in the manner in which we work and exchange goods and services would revolutionize labor, creating situations which led to substantial unrest until the masses could be trained to accept this. We note that the invention of the Gregorian Calendar of the 16th century was important in this regard, too, but the clock was the “something new”.
3. The lenses of the 16th and 17th century (telescope and microscope). These would open up two new worlds to mankind, the macroscopic heavens and the microscopic cellular life and chemicals. This would have a profound impact in philosophy and religion as well, calling into question the Earth’s role in the Universe and man’s role as a unique being amongst animals. It would be what allowed the eventual breakthroughs in medical science, hygiene and manipulation of chemicals. Also space flight, our satellites and even our methods of warfare, such as intercontinental ballistic missiles.
4. The Steam Engine of the 18th century. While played with before, this time people took it seriously. Due perhaps to being able to build more precise and powerful versions than before. It led to the mechanization of the world, freeing mankind from reliance on muscle, wind, water and animal power which had been our mainstays for all of history. The rise in productivity, and existence of the scientific method, let the steam engine lead to ever more applications and usages, and spurred more inventions based on the idea of the machine. Internal combustion engines and electrical and electronic machines are each a result of the original harnessing of steam power in mechanical form.
5. The Computer of the 19th century. Invented by Charles Babbage in 01822, it was not until it was done in an electronic form – as opposed to mechanical – that it really took off. The ability to store and manipulate staggeringly large volumes of data is so recent a development that we are still only now exploring all the possibilities and ramifications. While very recent, it has done so much so fast that it can be confidently included in this list.
Long News?
The Long Now Foundation has an article on their site about a clever concept, of a “now” that started 100 years ago when those who are a 100 years old were born, and ends 100 years from now when some born today are 100. But they also have a section called “Long News” that deals with current news that may last 10,000 years.
At the Encyclopedia Foundation we thought then that one could have a form of “long news” different than they do that would focus on the past 200 years. 02011 being “noon”, 100 years ago being midnight, and 100 years before that being yesterday at noon. Which is the time period a newspaper would typically draw from, historically.
While their section on breaking news that may have relevance for the long term is good, might it not be too soon to tell?
With that in mind, the Encyclopedia Foundation presents a form of “Long News” in which 02011 is noon, and we are giving you the news of the past 200 years, which is really just 24 hours in the big scheme of things. When you see the word “today” that means from 01911 (midnight) to 02011 (noon), if you see “yesterday” that means 01811 (noon) to 01911 (midnight).
By it’s very nature, this is the last one we can do until “tomorrow” or 02111!
*Ahem*
Yesterday around noon (01811) - A minor offshoot of Northern Europeans called “the British” along with their relatives in the middle of North America continued their work on applying steam engines to various industrial purposes. They have branched out from using it to pump water and operate various levers at factories to making use of it for what they call “trains”. These “trains” are quite remarkable in that a great number of very large carts, capable of hauling tons and tons of supplies and goods and even people, can be pulled by a steam engine “locomotive”, along a twin rail at speeds of – if reports can be believed – 25 to 30 miles per hour.
The rail is apparently to make it a uniform surface and make steering easier. Indeed, the operator is really only increasing or decreasing the speed, with the machine doing the work of a thousand men and horses.
Not content with that marvel, the same hardy group of Anglo-Saxons – who were only just running around naked in the forest last week on that island of theirs – have also hooked up steam engines to giant circular paddles for the propelling of boats upstream with no sails or teams of mules to pull them.
Scholars and savants who had an hour or so before dismissed the re-development of Hero’s toys as “pointless, given the abundant availability of slave labor all over the world” are now starting to think that some of these applications may have some long term possibilities. If nothing else, such a growth in machine culture could – some say – foster increased growth and development of other machines, fostering more dependence on them, and starting a cycle “the end of which cannot be wholly foreseen”.
Midnight (01911) – A remarkable 12 hours has past and earlier reports that a machine culture might be developing have proved out. The world now finds itself divided into two, those with a machine culture – the economically prosperous, the militarily strong and the masses educated – and those without, the economically poor, the militarily weak and the masses uneducated.
Slavery was outlawed and eradicated, and by the same group of Anglo-Saxons who developed the machines. Cynics suggest they were simply guaranteeing a market for their marvels, but ex-slaves are happy all the same. Collateral damage took place in the eradication of slavery when the much vaunted Constitution of the middle section of North America was changed from a compact of free states to a blueprint imposed upon subservient states. It had been less than 12 hours old.
The machines were able to develop far beyond just trains and ships, and the increased wealth fostered an increase in scientific and technological development not seen since a week and half ago when Rome was at its height. The past 12 hours have seen explosions in knowledge of taxonomy, botany, biology – including a fascinating theory of origins from a Charles Darwin – and medicine. Surgery can now be done painlessly, and it is known now why diseases can spread from person to person in crowded and dirty areas.
A small set back in physics, though. While up till around 11pm it was confidently expected that our clockwork universe would be fully understandable as soon as we got a handle on the composition and properties of ether, several European men have shown that ether may not exist, and more disturbingly that it may be the speed of light that is the constant, with a great many other things we took for granted being in a “flux” so to speak. We’ll keep you posted as things develop.
Hot air balloons were a brief marvel, but since about five minutes till midnight, planes have been on everyone’s mind. Heavier than air and driven by an “internal combustion engine” invented just a few hours before, it shows great potential, but only time will tell. Likewise with these personal automotive devices that some of the rich are playing about with, also relying on this “internal combustion”.
Socially, politically and economically, things have gone well. In fact, it is confidently expected that things will just keep getting better, and with no major wars for some time, we may be expecting to enter a golden age of peace and plenty.
True, there are stirrings of labor unrest amongst the lower classes, their organizational efforts are reaching unheard of heights and their demands for better working conditions are becoming harder to ignore. And in areas of the Earth less developed, the philosophy of collectivism propounded by a European named Marx are still in vogue.
Scholastically, at exactly midnight (01911) a great compendium of the knowledge of mankind was released, called the 11th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The very completeness of it is suggesting to some that mankind may have reached peak, and that there is little more to be discovered or invented. Our task now may be simply one of enlightening the less fortunate regions of Earth, and enjoying the world wide Utopia.
Noon today (02011) – Disaster struck in the small hours of the morning when the various nations of Europe exploded into a series of wars. It started out locally, but spread quickly to involve their various possessions and territories around the globe, and the people of the middle of North America came in on the side of their British cousins. Japan and China entered into the fray, for the first time showing the world that a non-European power could be both industrialized and militarily capable.
The war sputtered out for an hour or two, but resumed again with greater intensity, involving Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Asia and Australia. While the opening engagement earlier had killed millions due to our inexperience with just how much more horrific machines could make a war, this time it was estimated that over 100 million died, due to some nations attempting the wholesale extermination of various peoples in mechanized death factories and planned starvations.
By a little before 6am (01945) the conflict ended, but only with the atomic annihilation of two cities in Japan. At that, it sputtered on for a bit, as the large conglomerate of nations in Asia of European and non-Oriental descent were an empire of collectivism, and were engaged in competition with the European descended of middle North America with a culture of comparative freedom. Conflicts would erupt several times, not ending until a few hours ago with the surrender of the collectivist states of European Asia.
In science news, our knowledge of physics yesterday was apparently wrong. The special and general theories of relativity and the development of quantum mechanics still have scientists working feverishly on what is now called the Grand Unification Theory. Confidently expected since yesterday, we have yet to achieve any solid breakthroughs.
We have however managed to improve upon Babbage’s Analytical Machine that he invented yesterday. By making it “electronic” instead of mechanical, scientists in Europe, North America and East Asia have managed remarkable feats of computational power and miniaturization. Technicians have also managed to create a linkage of Earth’s diverse computers and computer systems into what two or three hours ago was named the “World Wide Web”.
And just five hours ago, a manned rocket of the middle North Americans landed on Earth’s moon. The North Americans went back and forth to it for a few minutes, then stopped. No word on why the North Americans abandoned their space program, and as of a few minutes ago they started the policy of hiring other nations to ship things for them, such as their request of India to slam a probe into the moon for them. Meanwhile, China is interested in space exploration, and Russia – who six hours ago had launched the first satellite into space and the first man into space – is thinking about going to the moon for the first time.
And if you thought that yesterday’s inventions were hard to keep up with, we can’t even begin to list all the inventions of the past 12 hours! Besides atomics and electronics and rocketry, we had breakthroughs in pharmaceuticals and vaccines that have eradicated many diseases, and allowed us to engineer even worse ones for warfare.
The other nations have caught up with the European and North American nations. The British lost their empire, critics say they just gave it up. China, went collectivist while the world was at war, and since around 6am have stubbornly clung to it, however there are signs that this was just for show and to keep other powers from, as they put it, “meddling”.
The majority of the world’s industrial production has shifted from the island of the British and middle section of North America to the lower part of North America, South America and East Asia.
On a sad note, the optimism of just before midnight is no more. Some say it was the wars, others the global pandemic that took place at the same time, others the increasingly mechanized culture led by statist and corporatist influences. Oddly, it was the sinking of one ship that is generally credited with the downturn in mankind’s optimism with machine culture and the future utopia. Shortly after midnight, just a minute before the wars, the HMS Titanic sank. It was supposed to be the peak of mankind’s technological and industrial prowess, and it seemed that it took the spirit out of a great many European and North American thinkers when it struck an iceberg and sank.
This just in! A little over an hour ago there was a resurgence of the Islamic Middle Eastern powers. You may remember this group from four or five days ago and the grief they used to give the Christian European powers then. Apparently some minor off shoot of the more radical ones has took on the middle section of North America – and lost! It started a bit before 11am with a sneak attack on civilian and political targets. Those of the middle of North America with the minor assistance of various allies in Europe and Asia took over two Middle East nations in response, killing the leader of one. Then they spent one hour hunting down the man who was responsible for the attack, and killed him.
It’s been another exciting 12 hours, folks! And who can say what will happen tomorrow? Keep tuned to this channel, though, because tonight at six (02061) we’ll have an update for you on the burning question, “Motion Pictures: Temporary Fad, or here to stay?”
*Ahem*
See what I mean? Long news needs a long perspective. In depth articles about steam engines and Babbage’s Analytical Machine. Columns on burning issues like “Discovering Agriculture: Boon or Boondoggle?” or “Should we have left nomadism?” or even more modern stuff like “The disappearance of the City State” or “Feudalism: Was it so bad?” Stuff we’ve had time to ponder. Trying to determine the importance of something that just came out a year ago…kind of hard.
It’s like those announcers on TV who say stuff like, “This is going to be the fight of the century!” Or, “This is going to be the trial of the century!” And they say this kind of thing pretty much each year from 02001 to now. At the Encyclopedia Foundation we say, “Too soon to tell.”
At the Encyclopedia Foundation we thought then that one could have a form of “long news” different than they do that would focus on the past 200 years. 02011 being “noon”, 100 years ago being midnight, and 100 years before that being yesterday at noon. Which is the time period a newspaper would typically draw from, historically.
While their section on breaking news that may have relevance for the long term is good, might it not be too soon to tell?
With that in mind, the Encyclopedia Foundation presents a form of “Long News” in which 02011 is noon, and we are giving you the news of the past 200 years, which is really just 24 hours in the big scheme of things. When you see the word “today” that means from 01911 (midnight) to 02011 (noon), if you see “yesterday” that means 01811 (noon) to 01911 (midnight).
By it’s very nature, this is the last one we can do until “tomorrow” or 02111!
*Ahem*
Yesterday around noon (01811) - A minor offshoot of Northern Europeans called “the British” along with their relatives in the middle of North America continued their work on applying steam engines to various industrial purposes. They have branched out from using it to pump water and operate various levers at factories to making use of it for what they call “trains”. These “trains” are quite remarkable in that a great number of very large carts, capable of hauling tons and tons of supplies and goods and even people, can be pulled by a steam engine “locomotive”, along a twin rail at speeds of – if reports can be believed – 25 to 30 miles per hour.
The rail is apparently to make it a uniform surface and make steering easier. Indeed, the operator is really only increasing or decreasing the speed, with the machine doing the work of a thousand men and horses.
Not content with that marvel, the same hardy group of Anglo-Saxons – who were only just running around naked in the forest last week on that island of theirs – have also hooked up steam engines to giant circular paddles for the propelling of boats upstream with no sails or teams of mules to pull them.
Scholars and savants who had an hour or so before dismissed the re-development of Hero’s toys as “pointless, given the abundant availability of slave labor all over the world” are now starting to think that some of these applications may have some long term possibilities. If nothing else, such a growth in machine culture could – some say – foster increased growth and development of other machines, fostering more dependence on them, and starting a cycle “the end of which cannot be wholly foreseen”.
Midnight (01911) – A remarkable 12 hours has past and earlier reports that a machine culture might be developing have proved out. The world now finds itself divided into two, those with a machine culture – the economically prosperous, the militarily strong and the masses educated – and those without, the economically poor, the militarily weak and the masses uneducated.
Slavery was outlawed and eradicated, and by the same group of Anglo-Saxons who developed the machines. Cynics suggest they were simply guaranteeing a market for their marvels, but ex-slaves are happy all the same. Collateral damage took place in the eradication of slavery when the much vaunted Constitution of the middle section of North America was changed from a compact of free states to a blueprint imposed upon subservient states. It had been less than 12 hours old.
The machines were able to develop far beyond just trains and ships, and the increased wealth fostered an increase in scientific and technological development not seen since a week and half ago when Rome was at its height. The past 12 hours have seen explosions in knowledge of taxonomy, botany, biology – including a fascinating theory of origins from a Charles Darwin – and medicine. Surgery can now be done painlessly, and it is known now why diseases can spread from person to person in crowded and dirty areas.
A small set back in physics, though. While up till around 11pm it was confidently expected that our clockwork universe would be fully understandable as soon as we got a handle on the composition and properties of ether, several European men have shown that ether may not exist, and more disturbingly that it may be the speed of light that is the constant, with a great many other things we took for granted being in a “flux” so to speak. We’ll keep you posted as things develop.
Hot air balloons were a brief marvel, but since about five minutes till midnight, planes have been on everyone’s mind. Heavier than air and driven by an “internal combustion engine” invented just a few hours before, it shows great potential, but only time will tell. Likewise with these personal automotive devices that some of the rich are playing about with, also relying on this “internal combustion”.
Socially, politically and economically, things have gone well. In fact, it is confidently expected that things will just keep getting better, and with no major wars for some time, we may be expecting to enter a golden age of peace and plenty.
True, there are stirrings of labor unrest amongst the lower classes, their organizational efforts are reaching unheard of heights and their demands for better working conditions are becoming harder to ignore. And in areas of the Earth less developed, the philosophy of collectivism propounded by a European named Marx are still in vogue.
Scholastically, at exactly midnight (01911) a great compendium of the knowledge of mankind was released, called the 11th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The very completeness of it is suggesting to some that mankind may have reached peak, and that there is little more to be discovered or invented. Our task now may be simply one of enlightening the less fortunate regions of Earth, and enjoying the world wide Utopia.
Noon today (02011) – Disaster struck in the small hours of the morning when the various nations of Europe exploded into a series of wars. It started out locally, but spread quickly to involve their various possessions and territories around the globe, and the people of the middle of North America came in on the side of their British cousins. Japan and China entered into the fray, for the first time showing the world that a non-European power could be both industrialized and militarily capable.
The war sputtered out for an hour or two, but resumed again with greater intensity, involving Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Asia and Australia. While the opening engagement earlier had killed millions due to our inexperience with just how much more horrific machines could make a war, this time it was estimated that over 100 million died, due to some nations attempting the wholesale extermination of various peoples in mechanized death factories and planned starvations.
By a little before 6am (01945) the conflict ended, but only with the atomic annihilation of two cities in Japan. At that, it sputtered on for a bit, as the large conglomerate of nations in Asia of European and non-Oriental descent were an empire of collectivism, and were engaged in competition with the European descended of middle North America with a culture of comparative freedom. Conflicts would erupt several times, not ending until a few hours ago with the surrender of the collectivist states of European Asia.
In science news, our knowledge of physics yesterday was apparently wrong. The special and general theories of relativity and the development of quantum mechanics still have scientists working feverishly on what is now called the Grand Unification Theory. Confidently expected since yesterday, we have yet to achieve any solid breakthroughs.
We have however managed to improve upon Babbage’s Analytical Machine that he invented yesterday. By making it “electronic” instead of mechanical, scientists in Europe, North America and East Asia have managed remarkable feats of computational power and miniaturization. Technicians have also managed to create a linkage of Earth’s diverse computers and computer systems into what two or three hours ago was named the “World Wide Web”.
And just five hours ago, a manned rocket of the middle North Americans landed on Earth’s moon. The North Americans went back and forth to it for a few minutes, then stopped. No word on why the North Americans abandoned their space program, and as of a few minutes ago they started the policy of hiring other nations to ship things for them, such as their request of India to slam a probe into the moon for them. Meanwhile, China is interested in space exploration, and Russia – who six hours ago had launched the first satellite into space and the first man into space – is thinking about going to the moon for the first time.
And if you thought that yesterday’s inventions were hard to keep up with, we can’t even begin to list all the inventions of the past 12 hours! Besides atomics and electronics and rocketry, we had breakthroughs in pharmaceuticals and vaccines that have eradicated many diseases, and allowed us to engineer even worse ones for warfare.
The other nations have caught up with the European and North American nations. The British lost their empire, critics say they just gave it up. China, went collectivist while the world was at war, and since around 6am have stubbornly clung to it, however there are signs that this was just for show and to keep other powers from, as they put it, “meddling”.
The majority of the world’s industrial production has shifted from the island of the British and middle section of North America to the lower part of North America, South America and East Asia.
On a sad note, the optimism of just before midnight is no more. Some say it was the wars, others the global pandemic that took place at the same time, others the increasingly mechanized culture led by statist and corporatist influences. Oddly, it was the sinking of one ship that is generally credited with the downturn in mankind’s optimism with machine culture and the future utopia. Shortly after midnight, just a minute before the wars, the HMS Titanic sank. It was supposed to be the peak of mankind’s technological and industrial prowess, and it seemed that it took the spirit out of a great many European and North American thinkers when it struck an iceberg and sank.
This just in! A little over an hour ago there was a resurgence of the Islamic Middle Eastern powers. You may remember this group from four or five days ago and the grief they used to give the Christian European powers then. Apparently some minor off shoot of the more radical ones has took on the middle section of North America – and lost! It started a bit before 11am with a sneak attack on civilian and political targets. Those of the middle of North America with the minor assistance of various allies in Europe and Asia took over two Middle East nations in response, killing the leader of one. Then they spent one hour hunting down the man who was responsible for the attack, and killed him.
It’s been another exciting 12 hours, folks! And who can say what will happen tomorrow? Keep tuned to this channel, though, because tonight at six (02061) we’ll have an update for you on the burning question, “Motion Pictures: Temporary Fad, or here to stay?”
*Ahem*
See what I mean? Long news needs a long perspective. In depth articles about steam engines and Babbage’s Analytical Machine. Columns on burning issues like “Discovering Agriculture: Boon or Boondoggle?” or “Should we have left nomadism?” or even more modern stuff like “The disappearance of the City State” or “Feudalism: Was it so bad?” Stuff we’ve had time to ponder. Trying to determine the importance of something that just came out a year ago…kind of hard.
It’s like those announcers on TV who say stuff like, “This is going to be the fight of the century!” Or, “This is going to be the trial of the century!” And they say this kind of thing pretty much each year from 02001 to now. At the Encyclopedia Foundation we say, “Too soon to tell.”
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Oldest "Organization"...and one reason why
The Encyclopedia Foundation has long said that “for the books to last, the library must last”. We’ve also said that for a library to last (as more than an abandoned building) the librarians must always be there. More exactly, there must always be librarians.
Which implies that besides seeing to it that the books are on metal plates that will last 10,000 years, and besides designing a vault or structure that can last 10,000 years, that we must have an organization that can last 10,000 years.
Of all the tasks, that is the hardest. The Encyclopedia Foundation has explained, in previous articles, the ways of preserving data on metal plates. That one is pretty much solved. What we have not gone over is long term buildings and long term organizations.
Long term buildings and/or vaults will be another article, in this one we examine long term organizations.
Is it possible to have an organization last 10,000 years? The honest answer is “No one knows”. And don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. You see, no one CAN know. We’ve never had one last that long. We don’t even have that many years of recorded history.
How long has a human organization lasted? What’s the record? That’s also hard to say. Part of it is the problem of “What counts as an organization?” and another is “When is an organization so different then it’s origins as to not be that same organization any more?”
The Encyclopedia Foundation, purely for purposes of this article and the discussion, are defining an organization as a group of people who have come together and contracted (written or verbally) to engage in certain activities. This could be an office soft ball team, a local non-denominational church, a mom and pop diner…or a government, an international church or a global mega-corporation.
Corporations, as specific entities with government sanctioned rights and privileges are not very old. While a loose definition could speak of corporations of ancient Rome and India, and many east Asian nations like Japan, Korea and China claim corporations going back to the 8th century, the 14th century is when they really got their start.
So 600 years is the maximum age, by one way of thinking, and even granting the title to questionable cases, 1,300 years is the oldest in continuous operation. The one we found from the 8th century, by the way, was an “inn” in Japan. A problem we have with classifying it as a continuously in existence corporation is that it was “just” an inn. A building. Presumably when it failed, some other group took it over, some other family moved in, some others decided to run it. There is not – sorry to modern hoteliers out there – a lot to running an “inn” that is little more than what we’d call a “boarding house”.
It could be said that each owner agreed with the same idea of hospitality providing. But we feel that more likely than a specific person to person agreement that the idea just naturally came to each new person, like a series of unrelated people deciding that a well is a good place to draw water from.
Governments have endured longer. But there’s problems with that. The British government goes back to 1066. Or does it go back to only 1660 as there was a break in the monarchy for some decades back then? Or does it go back further than 1066, as the Normans could be said to have “inherited” it from the native monarchy?
What counts as a continuous government is tricky. Oddly, the United States has a somewhat serious claim, it being governed by the same “operating instructions” since the adoption of the Constitution over 200 years ago. We hear also of the Icelandic Althing, a parliamentary style body that has met continuously – almost – since the 10th century. No instructions though, at least not written.
What of China? Well, there have been Chinese people governing Chinese people for several thousand years. But it can be doubted that such counts as a “continuous” entity when the only commonality in three thousand years is that they were Chinese.
The Encyclopedia Foundation brushes aside then, all claims of entities that have no organizing charter or “operating instructions”. Be it government approved or not. Without some kind of guiding charter, loosely adhered to, an organization cannot be said to be the same, just for occupying the same small boarding house or the same empire.
By this standard, the United State’s claim is better. But there is a dodge – it’s the same operating document, but they’ve an agency that can “interpret” it so that one stage of government in one era can bear little resemblance to another stage in another era. But it’s a “loose adherence”, so it counts.
By this standard, the United Kingdom could make a claim, less plausible though. The Magna Carta of 1215, a loose adherence to most stages of government since have paid lip service to.
What of religions? Do they last longer than governments? Actually, yes. The Catholic Church has lasted far and away longer than any government now operating. And in a sense is a government itself. They have an organizing charter, “operational instructions”, writings that say how things are supposed to go. They have maintained a loose adherence to it since325CE, though would claim to have originated in 33CE at the death (and ascension) of Jesus Christ.
Another contender would be Judaism. If we take their “Torah” as “operating instructions” and the Ten Commandments from Yahweh as their “charter”, then they are far and away the oldest continually existing organization on Earth. If we count from the time of Abraham, their founder, then they are about 4,000 years old. If we count the Rabbinic Judaism practiced now as distinct, then they still go back a couple of thousand years.
The Encyclopedia Foundation credits them with 4,000 years, though. The first five books of the Bible are instructions, and a charter. It matters not whether some believe a god or God organized them or that they made it up, the fact is that they did organize, cited authority, wrote down their intentions, and have had adherents busy pursuing the same goal for four millennia.
It would seem to us then, that if one wishes to learn how to have a long term organization that will last ten thousand years, that studying the how and why of the success of Judaism should be a priority.
There are many pros – and some cons – to the style of doing things that seem to have been adopted over the millennia by the practitioners. But perhaps the number one reason for the continued success seems to be that they are not burdened by an overarching central authority – other than the very book that is the “operational instructions”.
Thus “Judaism” as an “organization” is pretty much anywhere a single practitioner is. So long as he has the book in his hand or in his head, and strives to follow it.
That tip alone has been invaluable to our thoughts on long term stability. And we note that various Christian “organizations” have adopted this. We suspect that for any organization to last over the long haul, that this must be an element. After all, if an organization has a central authority well in command, then there can be a schism which shatters the organization, or a hijacking of leadership that shifts it so greatly that it is not the same organization.
Adherence then to written words of precise and legalistic meaning, as opposed to loyalty to a given leader or leadership, seems more stable. Over the long haul.
Organizations that give loyalty to leaders instead of a concept can last a long time – Catholicism, for instance – but they seem, from a historical vantage point, to shift more in mission, so that they either become noticeably different than the original, or one can extrapolate that they will in time shift enough to be too different.
When you see then a corporation that has “existed” 500 years, but one era it is hauling tea in wooden boats, another doing banking, another producing widgets for rockets , then one can see that its “continued existence” is that of the Japanese Inn. There is an infrastructure and available pool of capital and human workers that lend themselves to a variety of purposes that the corporation decides on. And each new generation of leadership controls those resources as they feel best. The infrastructure of the corporation is lasting, the name may well be the same, but the idea of hauling tea from India is long lost.
This idea, that of adherence to an idea not a man, is key. We also note that the Long Now Foundation has something they call “Layers of Time”. In this model, a very fast changing time is “fashion and art”, next is “commerce” which changes less quickly, then “infrastructure” which is yet slower to change, then “government” which is even slower to change, then “culture”, very slow…then “nature” which is the slowest to change of all.
Note the absence of religion. Nothing wrong with that, for it is subsumed in two categories. “Government”. And “Culture”. Many religions are organized on a hierarchical model. Thus are more like governments, and expected to last as long as government usually do. Or a bit longer, as they also, to varying extents, adhere to an idea, usually wrote of in a book. And the more irrelevant the leadership is, and the more they adhere to a specific book, the longer they’ll last.
When hierarchical leadership and centralized authority are the exception, not the rule, as in the case of Judaism, then they are more in the “Cultural” classification, as they do not act as a government, but entirely give allegiance to an idea that is wrote of in a book, and that must be followed with some degree of exactness.
There are more factors in long term organizations. Other articles will address them. But focus on this – they need to be “cultural” as opposed to “governmental”. They need to give allegiance to the idea, not the man. And so that a man does not corrupt the idea, it needs to be wrote down. And so that the sophistries of men don’t corrupt the plainly wrote words, an emphasis on education is a must.
Which implies that besides seeing to it that the books are on metal plates that will last 10,000 years, and besides designing a vault or structure that can last 10,000 years, that we must have an organization that can last 10,000 years.
Of all the tasks, that is the hardest. The Encyclopedia Foundation has explained, in previous articles, the ways of preserving data on metal plates. That one is pretty much solved. What we have not gone over is long term buildings and long term organizations.
Long term buildings and/or vaults will be another article, in this one we examine long term organizations.
Is it possible to have an organization last 10,000 years? The honest answer is “No one knows”. And don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. You see, no one CAN know. We’ve never had one last that long. We don’t even have that many years of recorded history.
How long has a human organization lasted? What’s the record? That’s also hard to say. Part of it is the problem of “What counts as an organization?” and another is “When is an organization so different then it’s origins as to not be that same organization any more?”
The Encyclopedia Foundation, purely for purposes of this article and the discussion, are defining an organization as a group of people who have come together and contracted (written or verbally) to engage in certain activities. This could be an office soft ball team, a local non-denominational church, a mom and pop diner…or a government, an international church or a global mega-corporation.
Corporations, as specific entities with government sanctioned rights and privileges are not very old. While a loose definition could speak of corporations of ancient Rome and India, and many east Asian nations like Japan, Korea and China claim corporations going back to the 8th century, the 14th century is when they really got their start.
So 600 years is the maximum age, by one way of thinking, and even granting the title to questionable cases, 1,300 years is the oldest in continuous operation. The one we found from the 8th century, by the way, was an “inn” in Japan. A problem we have with classifying it as a continuously in existence corporation is that it was “just” an inn. A building. Presumably when it failed, some other group took it over, some other family moved in, some others decided to run it. There is not – sorry to modern hoteliers out there – a lot to running an “inn” that is little more than what we’d call a “boarding house”.
It could be said that each owner agreed with the same idea of hospitality providing. But we feel that more likely than a specific person to person agreement that the idea just naturally came to each new person, like a series of unrelated people deciding that a well is a good place to draw water from.
Governments have endured longer. But there’s problems with that. The British government goes back to 1066. Or does it go back to only 1660 as there was a break in the monarchy for some decades back then? Or does it go back further than 1066, as the Normans could be said to have “inherited” it from the native monarchy?
What counts as a continuous government is tricky. Oddly, the United States has a somewhat serious claim, it being governed by the same “operating instructions” since the adoption of the Constitution over 200 years ago. We hear also of the Icelandic Althing, a parliamentary style body that has met continuously – almost – since the 10th century. No instructions though, at least not written.
What of China? Well, there have been Chinese people governing Chinese people for several thousand years. But it can be doubted that such counts as a “continuous” entity when the only commonality in three thousand years is that they were Chinese.
The Encyclopedia Foundation brushes aside then, all claims of entities that have no organizing charter or “operating instructions”. Be it government approved or not. Without some kind of guiding charter, loosely adhered to, an organization cannot be said to be the same, just for occupying the same small boarding house or the same empire.
By this standard, the United State’s claim is better. But there is a dodge – it’s the same operating document, but they’ve an agency that can “interpret” it so that one stage of government in one era can bear little resemblance to another stage in another era. But it’s a “loose adherence”, so it counts.
By this standard, the United Kingdom could make a claim, less plausible though. The Magna Carta of 1215, a loose adherence to most stages of government since have paid lip service to.
What of religions? Do they last longer than governments? Actually, yes. The Catholic Church has lasted far and away longer than any government now operating. And in a sense is a government itself. They have an organizing charter, “operational instructions”, writings that say how things are supposed to go. They have maintained a loose adherence to it since325CE, though would claim to have originated in 33CE at the death (and ascension) of Jesus Christ.
Another contender would be Judaism. If we take their “Torah” as “operating instructions” and the Ten Commandments from Yahweh as their “charter”, then they are far and away the oldest continually existing organization on Earth. If we count from the time of Abraham, their founder, then they are about 4,000 years old. If we count the Rabbinic Judaism practiced now as distinct, then they still go back a couple of thousand years.
The Encyclopedia Foundation credits them with 4,000 years, though. The first five books of the Bible are instructions, and a charter. It matters not whether some believe a god or God organized them or that they made it up, the fact is that they did organize, cited authority, wrote down their intentions, and have had adherents busy pursuing the same goal for four millennia.
It would seem to us then, that if one wishes to learn how to have a long term organization that will last ten thousand years, that studying the how and why of the success of Judaism should be a priority.
There are many pros – and some cons – to the style of doing things that seem to have been adopted over the millennia by the practitioners. But perhaps the number one reason for the continued success seems to be that they are not burdened by an overarching central authority – other than the very book that is the “operational instructions”.
Thus “Judaism” as an “organization” is pretty much anywhere a single practitioner is. So long as he has the book in his hand or in his head, and strives to follow it.
That tip alone has been invaluable to our thoughts on long term stability. And we note that various Christian “organizations” have adopted this. We suspect that for any organization to last over the long haul, that this must be an element. After all, if an organization has a central authority well in command, then there can be a schism which shatters the organization, or a hijacking of leadership that shifts it so greatly that it is not the same organization.
Adherence then to written words of precise and legalistic meaning, as opposed to loyalty to a given leader or leadership, seems more stable. Over the long haul.
Organizations that give loyalty to leaders instead of a concept can last a long time – Catholicism, for instance – but they seem, from a historical vantage point, to shift more in mission, so that they either become noticeably different than the original, or one can extrapolate that they will in time shift enough to be too different.
When you see then a corporation that has “existed” 500 years, but one era it is hauling tea in wooden boats, another doing banking, another producing widgets for rockets , then one can see that its “continued existence” is that of the Japanese Inn. There is an infrastructure and available pool of capital and human workers that lend themselves to a variety of purposes that the corporation decides on. And each new generation of leadership controls those resources as they feel best. The infrastructure of the corporation is lasting, the name may well be the same, but the idea of hauling tea from India is long lost.
This idea, that of adherence to an idea not a man, is key. We also note that the Long Now Foundation has something they call “Layers of Time”. In this model, a very fast changing time is “fashion and art”, next is “commerce” which changes less quickly, then “infrastructure” which is yet slower to change, then “government” which is even slower to change, then “culture”, very slow…then “nature” which is the slowest to change of all.
Note the absence of religion. Nothing wrong with that, for it is subsumed in two categories. “Government”. And “Culture”. Many religions are organized on a hierarchical model. Thus are more like governments, and expected to last as long as government usually do. Or a bit longer, as they also, to varying extents, adhere to an idea, usually wrote of in a book. And the more irrelevant the leadership is, and the more they adhere to a specific book, the longer they’ll last.
When hierarchical leadership and centralized authority are the exception, not the rule, as in the case of Judaism, then they are more in the “Cultural” classification, as they do not act as a government, but entirely give allegiance to an idea that is wrote of in a book, and that must be followed with some degree of exactness.
There are more factors in long term organizations. Other articles will address them. But focus on this – they need to be “cultural” as opposed to “governmental”. They need to give allegiance to the idea, not the man. And so that a man does not corrupt the idea, it needs to be wrote down. And so that the sophistries of men don’t corrupt the plainly wrote words, an emphasis on education is a must.
Planned Obsolescence?
The Encyclopedia Foundation has as its goal the preservation of knowledge for ten thousand years. To this end we’ve had other articles describing the types of books and book sets we wish to preserve first, on a single metal plate that could easily accommodate the 67,000 pages worth we are wishing.
The Encyclopedia Foundation also has articles on how those 67,000 pages could each be read with a 1,000x Optical Microscope, perhaps even a 500x one. And we’ve even wrote an article on how and why we expect the price to fall to at least $1,000 per plate, if not even a few hundred bucks a plate or less.
So. We have provided the idea, the list of books, the rationale for why they’d be the best, the additional books for a second plate, and all the rationales for that. And how –probably within 20 years – almost anyone would be able to do this exact same thing.
Are we planning then to be obsolete? Will there be much point to our existence when everyone can afford to have a plate or two or three with almost everything one could possibly wish to preserve on it? In a future world (2031) where each plate might only be $250 then four plates would only cost what a good Encyclopedia set cost back in the day. Several tens of millions of people, all around the nation and Earth, may well have a set collecting dust on their coffee tables, to impress guests with how erudite and far sighted they are!
The answer is then yes. And no.
You see, our means of data preservation involves metal plates. Much like the Long Now Foundation is using metal discs. Same technology, in fact, with credit to them for getting such further along. But the means of preserving our plates is the same plan they have for preserving the discs – and that involves wide distribution.
You see, the best way to make sure one of the discs or plates survive is to have millions of them scattered everywhere. So that hopefully at least one will survive 10,000 years. If then this becomes popular, and “everyone” has one on that hypothetical coffee table, then it is not so much that we – or the Long Range Foundation – are obsolete, more like “Mission Accomplished”!
Does this then mean that each long range organization packs up and goes home? No, for there is a difference between one single mission accomplished (spreading the discs and plates far and wide) and every mission being accomplished.
Both the Encyclopedia Foundation and the Long Range Foundation do have other goals. Not speaking to theirs, but ours are to have a 10,000 year library in existence, not just metal plates in existence. We have always said that “for the books to last, the library must last”. And it’s true.
The most popular book for a family to own for several centuries, up till the early 20th, was the Bible. And those books were made with a paper that lasts a good deal longer than the paper we make routine books out of today. A bible made in 1750 would be easily readable today, assuming no unusually harsh environmental factors.
So where are they? You know, the million or so that were made? Well, they were so common – like we hope the metal discs and plates will be – that they weren’t valued all that much. For one lifetime they were used. For a couple of more lifetimes – son and grandson – they might have been kept. At some point they migrated to an attic because a new one was bought. At some point they became trash.
We could advise then checking the landfills, but such conditions would not have let them last long at that point. So now a bible from 1750 is a find. As is one from 1850. 1850 being a period so recent that this author personally remembers hearing my great grandfather speak of people he knew who were alive at that time.
What this means then is that even if these plates and discs catch on as a fad or a craze, and tens of millions are made, that doesn’t mean that they’ll all be around 50 years or 100 years later. True, they will last in a dump longer than a paper book of 200 years ago will. But they are not indestructible. They can be scratched, or they’d not be able to be engraved in the first place. Moisture, repeated freezing and thawing, even simple erosion by wind and rain, none of these things are going to bode well for the information on the abandoned plate to be readable.
There are then, other “missions”. Besides spreading those discs and plates far and wide and hoping, there is also selectivity at play. For instance, the Encyclopedia Foundation has plans to see to it that the Long Range Foundation, the Catholic Church, the Jesus Christ Church of Latter Day Saints, and a Buddhist Temple have copies.
Another mission though, and more to the point of our continued existence, is not only to give such long range organizations copies, but to ourselves be one of the long range organizations. Like the “Library of Utility” we wrote of in another article, we plan on being a place where the information can be safely stored for 10,000 years. Not just a long lasting plate, but a long lasting building. And not just a long lasting building, but a long lasting organization.
If we can say – and do – that “for the books to last, the library must last”, then it can also be said that “for the library to last, there must always be librarians”.
A daunting task, to have an organization last 10,000 years. To do so requires a number of factors. But that’s another article. Suffice to say, we will not be obsolete, we will be preserving the books, assisting those in need, and acquiring and transcribing new knowledge and more of the old knowledge as appropriate.
The Encyclopedia Foundation also has articles on how those 67,000 pages could each be read with a 1,000x Optical Microscope, perhaps even a 500x one. And we’ve even wrote an article on how and why we expect the price to fall to at least $1,000 per plate, if not even a few hundred bucks a plate or less.
So. We have provided the idea, the list of books, the rationale for why they’d be the best, the additional books for a second plate, and all the rationales for that. And how –probably within 20 years – almost anyone would be able to do this exact same thing.
Are we planning then to be obsolete? Will there be much point to our existence when everyone can afford to have a plate or two or three with almost everything one could possibly wish to preserve on it? In a future world (2031) where each plate might only be $250 then four plates would only cost what a good Encyclopedia set cost back in the day. Several tens of millions of people, all around the nation and Earth, may well have a set collecting dust on their coffee tables, to impress guests with how erudite and far sighted they are!
The answer is then yes. And no.
You see, our means of data preservation involves metal plates. Much like the Long Now Foundation is using metal discs. Same technology, in fact, with credit to them for getting such further along. But the means of preserving our plates is the same plan they have for preserving the discs – and that involves wide distribution.
You see, the best way to make sure one of the discs or plates survive is to have millions of them scattered everywhere. So that hopefully at least one will survive 10,000 years. If then this becomes popular, and “everyone” has one on that hypothetical coffee table, then it is not so much that we – or the Long Range Foundation – are obsolete, more like “Mission Accomplished”!
Does this then mean that each long range organization packs up and goes home? No, for there is a difference between one single mission accomplished (spreading the discs and plates far and wide) and every mission being accomplished.
Both the Encyclopedia Foundation and the Long Range Foundation do have other goals. Not speaking to theirs, but ours are to have a 10,000 year library in existence, not just metal plates in existence. We have always said that “for the books to last, the library must last”. And it’s true.
The most popular book for a family to own for several centuries, up till the early 20th, was the Bible. And those books were made with a paper that lasts a good deal longer than the paper we make routine books out of today. A bible made in 1750 would be easily readable today, assuming no unusually harsh environmental factors.
So where are they? You know, the million or so that were made? Well, they were so common – like we hope the metal discs and plates will be – that they weren’t valued all that much. For one lifetime they were used. For a couple of more lifetimes – son and grandson – they might have been kept. At some point they migrated to an attic because a new one was bought. At some point they became trash.
We could advise then checking the landfills, but such conditions would not have let them last long at that point. So now a bible from 1750 is a find. As is one from 1850. 1850 being a period so recent that this author personally remembers hearing my great grandfather speak of people he knew who were alive at that time.
What this means then is that even if these plates and discs catch on as a fad or a craze, and tens of millions are made, that doesn’t mean that they’ll all be around 50 years or 100 years later. True, they will last in a dump longer than a paper book of 200 years ago will. But they are not indestructible. They can be scratched, or they’d not be able to be engraved in the first place. Moisture, repeated freezing and thawing, even simple erosion by wind and rain, none of these things are going to bode well for the information on the abandoned plate to be readable.
There are then, other “missions”. Besides spreading those discs and plates far and wide and hoping, there is also selectivity at play. For instance, the Encyclopedia Foundation has plans to see to it that the Long Range Foundation, the Catholic Church, the Jesus Christ Church of Latter Day Saints, and a Buddhist Temple have copies.
Another mission though, and more to the point of our continued existence, is not only to give such long range organizations copies, but to ourselves be one of the long range organizations. Like the “Library of Utility” we wrote of in another article, we plan on being a place where the information can be safely stored for 10,000 years. Not just a long lasting plate, but a long lasting building. And not just a long lasting building, but a long lasting organization.
If we can say – and do – that “for the books to last, the library must last”, then it can also be said that “for the library to last, there must always be librarians”.
A daunting task, to have an organization last 10,000 years. To do so requires a number of factors. But that’s another article. Suffice to say, we will not be obsolete, we will be preserving the books, assisting those in need, and acquiring and transcribing new knowledge and more of the old knowledge as appropriate.
105 books on one Metal Plate
A reading of the articles of the Encyclopedia Foundation shows that we have a monomania for getting collection of 105 books on one metal plate that would allow someone to re-create civilization as it was in 1911. Or, as we’ve admitted, to at least be a good start.
How feasible is this? 105 books? On one metal plate? Readable without an electron microscope?
Let us consider.
The books in question - for those of you not fortunate enough to have read our previous articles! – are as follows:
1. 20 volumes of children’s text books. Six will be the McGuffey’s Reader set pre-1911. 14 more will be textbooks on History, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Geology. And a Dictionary, though we did not specifically name that as amongst the 20 in earlier articles. Approximately 100 to 500 pages per book, take 300 pages as an average, or 6,000 pages total.
2. 32 volumes of the 13th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. This is merely the 29 volume 11th edition with three supplemental volumes updating it to the nineteen twenties. Approximately 1,000 pages per volume or 32 thousand pages total.
3. 51 volumes of the Harvard Classics. Approximately 500 pages per volume, or 25,500 pages total.
4. The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. One volume, but about 1,200 pages total.
5. The King James Version of the Holy Bible. Technically 66 books, but in one volume, and about 1,900 pages total.
All that adds up to 105 books. But around 67,000 pages. (These are deliberate overestimates, but not by too much)
The Rosetta Disc at 2.8 inches holds up to 15,000 pages, though apparently the first one had 13,500 pages on it. And it was readable by that 1000x Optical Microscope.
2.8 by 2.8 inches is 7.84 square inches. But a piece of letter size paper (8.5 by 10) has 85 square inches. Since that, divided by 7.84 equals about 10.84 we can see that we can store 10.84 times as much information on an 8.5 by 10 metal plate as can be stored on the 2.8 inch disc.
Let us say just ten times as much. That would allow us to store 150,000 pages on one 8.5 by 10 metal plate. And we only needed 67,000 pages.
Now we could then add more. But what we’d rather do is have the pages twice as big. So that it takes only a 500x or less microscope to view the data. We wish this to be as simple for future viewers as possible.
And if possible, we’d like the plate to have regular size letters, readable by eye, telling everyone what it is, with the 67,000 pages as a “second layer”. We’d also like it be “artistic”, like the old timey books where the first letter of the page is grandly oversized and ornate.
More on that kind of thing in another article.
How feasible is this? 105 books? On one metal plate? Readable without an electron microscope?
Let us consider.
The books in question - for those of you not fortunate enough to have read our previous articles! – are as follows:
1. 20 volumes of children’s text books. Six will be the McGuffey’s Reader set pre-1911. 14 more will be textbooks on History, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Geology. And a Dictionary, though we did not specifically name that as amongst the 20 in earlier articles. Approximately 100 to 500 pages per book, take 300 pages as an average, or 6,000 pages total.
2. 32 volumes of the 13th Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. This is merely the 29 volume 11th edition with three supplemental volumes updating it to the nineteen twenties. Approximately 1,000 pages per volume or 32 thousand pages total.
3. 51 volumes of the Harvard Classics. Approximately 500 pages per volume, or 25,500 pages total.
4. The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. One volume, but about 1,200 pages total.
5. The King James Version of the Holy Bible. Technically 66 books, but in one volume, and about 1,900 pages total.
All that adds up to 105 books. But around 67,000 pages. (These are deliberate overestimates, but not by too much)
The Rosetta Disc at 2.8 inches holds up to 15,000 pages, though apparently the first one had 13,500 pages on it. And it was readable by that 1000x Optical Microscope.
2.8 by 2.8 inches is 7.84 square inches. But a piece of letter size paper (8.5 by 10) has 85 square inches. Since that, divided by 7.84 equals about 10.84 we can see that we can store 10.84 times as much information on an 8.5 by 10 metal plate as can be stored on the 2.8 inch disc.
Let us say just ten times as much. That would allow us to store 150,000 pages on one 8.5 by 10 metal plate. And we only needed 67,000 pages.
Now we could then add more. But what we’d rather do is have the pages twice as big. So that it takes only a 500x or less microscope to view the data. We wish this to be as simple for future viewers as possible.
And if possible, we’d like the plate to have regular size letters, readable by eye, telling everyone what it is, with the 67,000 pages as a “second layer”. We’d also like it be “artistic”, like the old timey books where the first letter of the page is grandly oversized and ornate.
More on that kind of thing in another article.
Thank the Long Now Foundation
The Encyclopedia Foundation wishes to draw your attention to the Ampex Company. In 1956 they came out with the first VCR for $50,000. It was too expensive for most people, and it was another nine years before Sony had one out for $1,000 in 1965. As the prices dropped, more people could afford to buy them, more people buying them allowed mass production and economies of scale, long and short they eventually went for about $25 new, and as for “used”, that was usually for free as people getting new ones would just give the old ones away.
And what does all that have to do with the Long Now Foundation, let alone explain why you should thank them?
Well, consider their project to archive knowledge, of which “languages” are the first knowledge they’ve chose. They have a Rosetta Disc project that has thousands of languages preserved on a 2.8 inch disc. That 2.8 inch disc has 13,500 pages of language information readable by a 1000x Optical Telescope – such that was available technologically in the 17th century!
Cost? $25,000.
It actually cost them far more, but that’s what the first one went for. And that is a shame, for it means that we at the Encyclopedia Foundation can’t afford to do what we want to do. Too expensive…okay, you see where we’re going!
It was too expensive, but that technology, which their interest helped develop and perfect, has created some markets. Diamond engraving and micro-engraving valuables with invisible identification numbers. And this is leading to thoughts of various groups and agencies archiving information for the long haul, readable with only an eye and a microscope, but able to be accessed by a computer that can scan it.
Which means – perhaps not in nine years, but sometime – that the price will drop. We go so far to say that we know it will. Same as the price of the VCR dropped.
Here’s the deal. We know it will drop in price as the technology to do this has enough applications that it will be popular to a staggeringly large number of agencies. True, this is not a product that every individual is going to want or need, not like the VCR was, so we do not expect it to drop to $25. But if you ever wondered in previous articles why we estimate the cost of making a metal plate at $1,000, now you know why we are confident saying that.
And we may get even luckier. The price will probably end up being a few hundred bucks, sooner rather than later. And if someone finds some app for it that the general populace finds faddish or cool, then it could drop down even more.
But just like you owe your past ability to purchase a VCR for $25 to the long range looking pioneers who paid $50,000 and $1,000 for theirs, so the Encyclopedia Foundation – and all of humanity that will benefit – owes thanks to those at the Long Now Foundation.
If you’d like to thank them, and help in your own way to reduce the cost of this data storage technology, then please go visit their site and become a member at their low monthly membership rate. Your great, great, great, great grandchildren will thank you!
And what does all that have to do with the Long Now Foundation, let alone explain why you should thank them?
Well, consider their project to archive knowledge, of which “languages” are the first knowledge they’ve chose. They have a Rosetta Disc project that has thousands of languages preserved on a 2.8 inch disc. That 2.8 inch disc has 13,500 pages of language information readable by a 1000x Optical Telescope – such that was available technologically in the 17th century!
Cost? $25,000.
It actually cost them far more, but that’s what the first one went for. And that is a shame, for it means that we at the Encyclopedia Foundation can’t afford to do what we want to do. Too expensive…okay, you see where we’re going!
It was too expensive, but that technology, which their interest helped develop and perfect, has created some markets. Diamond engraving and micro-engraving valuables with invisible identification numbers. And this is leading to thoughts of various groups and agencies archiving information for the long haul, readable with only an eye and a microscope, but able to be accessed by a computer that can scan it.
Which means – perhaps not in nine years, but sometime – that the price will drop. We go so far to say that we know it will. Same as the price of the VCR dropped.
Here’s the deal. We know it will drop in price as the technology to do this has enough applications that it will be popular to a staggeringly large number of agencies. True, this is not a product that every individual is going to want or need, not like the VCR was, so we do not expect it to drop to $25. But if you ever wondered in previous articles why we estimate the cost of making a metal plate at $1,000, now you know why we are confident saying that.
And we may get even luckier. The price will probably end up being a few hundred bucks, sooner rather than later. And if someone finds some app for it that the general populace finds faddish or cool, then it could drop down even more.
But just like you owe your past ability to purchase a VCR for $25 to the long range looking pioneers who paid $50,000 and $1,000 for theirs, so the Encyclopedia Foundation – and all of humanity that will benefit – owes thanks to those at the Long Now Foundation.
If you’d like to thank them, and help in your own way to reduce the cost of this data storage technology, then please go visit their site and become a member at their low monthly membership rate. Your great, great, great, great grandchildren will thank you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)